MISHNAH: Rebbi Aqiba says, from where that idolatry makes impure by load like a menstruating woman? For it is said¹. 30:22., you shall throw it away like feeling miserable; you will call it excrement. Since the menstruating makes impure by load². 15:20–21 it is stated that anything the menstruating woman lies on becomes an original source of impurity. This means that if a woman in her period lies on top of ten mattresses and somebody touches the lowest one, which the woman never touched, he becomes impure as if he had touched the woman herself., idolatry also makes impure by load³.

footnotes: ¹ Is ² In Lev ³ For R. Aqiba anybody who carries an idol becomes impure even if he never touched the idol.

HALAKHAH: ²⁹, where the differences in spelling are noted. Evidence points to Šabbat as the primary source. Much of the argument is found in Babli Šabbat 82b–83b. There is written abomination about the menstruating woman, and there is written abomination about idolatry, and there is written abomination about vermin. There is written abomination about the menstruating woman, for anybody who would commit any of these abomination s³⁰. 18:29. The verse refers to all prohibitions of a sexual nature., etc. Abomination about idolatry, and do not bring any abomination into your house³¹. 7:26. This verse refers uniquely to idols and idolatry., etc. Abomination about vermin, do not eat any abomination³². 14:2. The verse refers to all food prohibitions.. But I do not know to which of them it was compared. Rebbi Aqiba says, it was compared to abomination regarding the menstruating woman. As the menstruating woman imparts impurity by load, also idolatry imparts impurity by load². 15:20–21 it is stated that anything the menstruating woman lies on becomes an original source of impurity. This means that if a woman in her period lies on top of ten mattresses and somebody touches the lowest one, which the woman never touched, he becomes impure as if he had touched the woman herself.. Or since the menstruating woman imparts impurity through a cover stone³³ 69b., does idolatry impart impurity through a cover stone? Rebbi Zeriqan in the name of Rav Jehudah, but some say in the name of Rav Ḥisda: Rebbi Aqiba agrees with the Sages that idolatry does not impart impurity through a cover stone. But the rabbis say it was compared to abomination s of vermin. As vermin imparts impurity by motion³⁴, so also idolatry imparts impurity by motion. Or as vermin in the size of a lentil imparts impurity³⁵ 1:8. This minimum size for generation of impurity does not apply to complete limbs. does idolatry in the size of a lentil also impart impurity? Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: They were yoked to Baal Peor and ate sacrifices to the dead³⁶. 106:28.. As the dead in the volume of an olive impart impurity so idolatry in the volume of an olive imparts impurity. Or since a corpse imparts impurity once a person puts his finger tips in³⁷ 2:1 Note 34) which is created by any part of a person’s body being under the same roof as a corpse, even if it is only a finger tip., could I think that idolatry imparts once a person puts his finger tips in? Tearing down, tearing down from the leprous house³⁸. 14:45). Pagan altars must be torn down (Deut. 12:3). By the nature of the topics, the verb נתץ is used in the singular in the first case, in the plural in the second. Therefore this is a comparison (הקש), not an “equal cut” (גזירה שוה); the laws will be similar, not exactly identical.. Since in a leprous house when he entered with his head and most of his body³⁹. 14:46, which decrees impurity for anybody coming into the house, Sifra Meṣoraˋ Pereq 5(4), Mishnah Negaˋim 13:8., so idolatry when he entered with his head and most of his body. Rebbi Ḥanania said, this means that the impurity of idolatry is not consistent⁴⁰. For otherwise, why does one compare if for the facile [impurity] and does not compare for the strict? Rebbi Mana said, it is consistent. Why was it compared to a corpse and to vermin? To inform in both cases about the facile [impurity] attached to it⁴¹, in: “Confrontations with Judaism”, ed. Ph. Longworth, London 1966, p. 185.. This is for a broken idol. But a whole one even in the most minute size⁴² 6:1 Note 64)., as Rebbi Ḥuna, Rebbi Ḥama bar Gorion said in the name of Rav: Baal was the penis gland in the form of a bean: They selected the Baal of circumcision as god⁴³. 8:33. Instead of “Baal of Covenant” one reads “Baal of circumcision” referring to the place of circumcision. This identifies the Semitic Baal with the Greek and Roman Priapus..

footnotes: ²⁹ This and the the following paragraph also are Halakhah 3:8 in Avodah zara ³⁰ Lev ³¹ Deut ³² Deut ² In Lev ³³ Stone is impervious to impurity. In general, anything not susceptible to impurity cannot transmit impurity. The one and only exception is impurity caused by genital discharges where impurity by load (Note 2) applies to anything under the affected person and even a stone plate covering a mattress will not shield the mattress from impurity if a person afflicted by a genital discharge sits on the stone. Babli Niddah ³⁴ Here one has a serious discrepancy between the technical terminology of the Babli and the Yerushalmi. In the Babli impurity by motion is a form of impurity by load: If a person suffering from a genital discharge moves something indirectly or is moved with it, he imparts impurity. In the Yerushalmi this is consistently designated by its Mishnaic name, מִדְרָס, “stepping on.” This kind of impurity emphatically does not exist for vermin, or anything other than genital discharges. Therefore היסט the “motion” mentioned here must be that of a person’s hand touching an impure object. Transfer of impurity by touch is the only one mentioned for the eight kinds of impure vermin. ³⁵ Mishnah Ahilut ³⁶ Ps ³⁷ This refers to “tent” impurity (Ševuot ³⁸ A house afflicted with recurrent “leprosy” must be torn down (Lev ³⁹ Based on Lev ⁴⁰ Neither R. Aqiba nor the rabbis are consistent in their comparisons. ⁴¹ The impurity of idols and idolatry should follow the rules common for impurities generated either by dead vermin or by bodily discharges. This argument is known in the Babli tradition as הַצַּד הַשָּׁוֶה “the equal part;” cf. H. Guggenheimer, Logical Problems in Jewish Tradition ⁴² This is consistent with the impurity of animals as food, where a complete creature always is biblically forbidden irrespective of size (cf. Nazir ⁴³ Jud

What is Rebbi Aqiba’s reason? You should treat it as an abomination⁴⁴. 7:26., like a menstruating woman. What is the rabbis’ reason? You should detest it, like vermin. How do the rabbis uphold Rebbi Aqiba’s reason, you should treat it as abomination? Treat it as excrement, make it vile⁴⁵ 20 (p. 332 ed. Horovitz-Rabin).. How does Rebbi Aqiba uphold the rabbis’ reason, you should treat it as abomination? Call it feces, treat it as excrement, make it vile. From where “make it vile” for the rabbis? Rebbi Samuel, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: you shall call it excrement; treat it as excrement, make it vile What is called King’s Face is called Dog’s Face. Spring of the Cup Spring of the Thorn. The Place of Fortune Place of Undress⁴⁶. Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of Rav Huna: The Ai which is near Bet-Awen East of Bethel⁴⁷. 7:2.. Earlier it was called Bethel but now one calls it Bet-Awen⁴⁸, Tübingen 1938, identifies Bet-Awen as the old name of “The Ai (ruin)”; cf. Arabic ١ون “calm, tranquillity”.). It was stated in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: If one does not want to call it ‘Omda one calls it ‘Amida⁴⁹ 7:2; Gen. rabba 39(24), on Gen. 12:8. since Rebbi Abba bar Cahana said, there one calls a good deed ˋomda⁵⁰ but the flow of urine ‘amida⁵¹. How does Rebbi Aqiba interpret you shall call it excrement? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abin, Rav Huna in the name of Rav Joseph⁵²: Rebbi Ḥuna.: from here that one does not tell anybody to leave unless he entered with his head and most of his body.

footnotes: ⁴⁴ Deut ⁴⁵ Babli 46a, Mekhilta dR. Ismael Mišpatim ⁴⁶ All these places and most of their idolatrous or obscene meanings are unknown. A similar list is as Tannaitic text in the Babli 46a, Tosephta 6:4. [Perhaps כוס should be read as كُس “behind”, in particular as part of the female anatomy (E. G.)] ⁴⁷ Jos ⁴⁸ It seems that the translator of the LXX read the verse in the way of the Talmud and eliminated the mention of Bet-Awen, “the House of Iniquity”, as a gloss, as accepted by the moderns. (However, E. Täubler in a marginal Note to his copy of M. Noth’s Das Buch Josua ⁴⁹ Yalqut Jos. ad ⁵⁰ Syriac עמד. ⁵¹ Greek ἀμίς, -ίδος, ἡ, “chamber pot” (identified by Musaphia.) ⁵² Since Rav Joseph lived two generations after Rav Huna, one has to read with the text in Avodah zarah

There exists a baraita which says, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like a menstruating woman. Also there exists a baraita which says, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like crawling animals⁵³ 83a.. The one who says, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like a menstruating woman, is understandable. But concerning the one who says, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like crawling animals, is it not called “unwell” only for its appurtenances⁵⁴. 30:22, which is the base of R. Aqiba’s argument, reads: You will defile the cover of your silver statues and the clothing of your golden casts; you shall throw it away like feeling miserable, you shall call it excrement. Therefore the reference of “feeling miserable”, which is the description of a female period, refers to appurtenances only. The second version of the position of R. Aqiba seems untenable.? You will defile the coating of your silver gods and the clothing of your molten gold. Explain it if they were engraved on its body. Rebbi Jacob of Kefar Ḥanan said, explain it if one worships the ephod itself⁵⁵, similar to what is written, Gideon turned it into an ephod⁵⁶. 8:27.. Our Mishnah follows him who said, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like a menstruating woman. But did we not state: “its stones, its wood, and its dust make impure like a crawling animal⁵⁷ 3:8. Since this sentence in the Mishnah precedes the statement of R. Aqiba who imposes the impurity of niddah also on the stones which form the shell of the house of worship but are not the object of worship.”? Explain it if he worshipped the house itself and then built it up. But did we not state “there are three houses”⁵⁸ 3:9. Only a house originally built as a temple is permanently forbidden; all others can be cleansed by removing the idol and all installations and ornamentations made for it. How could one decree severe impurity which can be easily eliminated?? Explain it if he worshipped the house itself and then renovated it, as Rebbi Abba, Rab Huna said in the name of Rav: One who worships a house makes it forbidden⁵⁹ 20a.. Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If somebody dedicates a house one does commit larceny with it. Rebbi Zeˋira said, about this the rabbis disagree. For him who says that he forbade it one may commit larceny with it, but for him who says that he does not forbid it, one does not commit larceny with it⁶⁰. 27:14–15). Improper use of dedicated things is larceny which must be expiated by a sacrifice and payment of a fine, (Lev. 5:14–16). Just as real estate cannot become forbidden by idolatry, larceny by improper use of dedicated objects does not apply to real estate. If a house is considered real estate, it cannot become forbidden by worship, and its improper use while in the possession of the Temple cannot trigger a fine for larceny. If it is not considered real estate since the building materials were movables before being used, but it can become forbidden and improper use can trigger the fine.? Rebbi Ḥaggai objected before Rebbi Yose, does not a Mishnah disagree with Rav? “A trough in a rock: one does not fill from it.⁶¹ 5:7. The ashes of the Red Cow, used to purify a person from the impurity of the dead, must be strewn on flowing water in a vessel (Num. 19:17). A vessel is movable; therefore a trough hewn into the rock is not a vessel. The water flowing from the source into the trough becomes standing water. Therefore it may be used neither (1) to fill a vessel for the ashes, nor (2) to put some ashes in the water, “to sanctify it”, nor (3) to sprinkle the water on impure persons to purify them. In addition, a corpse in a “tent” makes everything in the tent impure including the contents of vessels whose cover is not tightly fastened (Num. 19:15). Since the trough is not a vessel, if it is under one roof with a corpse it only needs to be covered but the cover does not have to be fastened. A miqweh (ritual bath) has to contain 40 seah of water. It becomes invalid if 3 log (⅛ seah) of water from a vessel is poured into it before it has reached the level of 40 seah. If the trough is not a vessel, its water cannot invalidate the miqweh. On the other hand, if the trough was a vessel before it was fastened in the rock, it can be used for the ashes of the red cow, and its water will disqualify the miqweh. Since a house was not a vessel before being connected to the ground, it should be considered real estate and not be subject to prohibition because of worship.” Because he excavated it and after that combined it⁶². Then not if he fixed it and after that excavated it⁶³. Is this house not as if he excavated it and after that combined it? What does Rav do with it? He explains that the hewing of stones is the completion of work on them⁶⁴. Does this not disagree with Rebbi Joḥanan, since Rebbi Joḥanan said, an idol which was broken is forbidden. And so we are thinking to say if in the future he cannot restore it in its entirety it is permitted according to everybody⁶⁵. But did we not state, “there are three kinds of stones”⁶⁶ 3:10.? Explain it that he worshipped every single stone and then builds with them⁶⁷. Even with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish this does not disagree, as Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, an idol which was broken is permitted⁶⁸ 20a.. And so we are thinking to say if in the future he can restore it in its entirety it is forbidden according to everybody, and Rebbi Yudan, the father of Rebbi Mattaniah, said, if they remain in their place is this not as if in the future he can restore it in its entirety? And these remain at their place. Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav, one who worships a house makes it forbidden⁵⁹ 20a., a tree he does not make forbidden. But did we not state, “there are three kinds of Ashera⁶⁹ (Mishnah Avodah zarah 3:11) but no idol is found buried under it. Then as connected to the ground it should not be part of the real estate and not be forbidden. It becomes permanently forbidden only if it was planted as a holy shoot.”? Explain it that he worshipped a vine and then planted it.

footnotes: ⁵³ The first opinion is the teaching of R. Aqiba in the Mishnah, the second is ascribed to R. Aqiba in the Babli, Šabbat ⁵⁴ The full text of Is ⁵⁵ The statue and its ornamental vestments were two separate objects of worship. Either explanation is possible. ⁵⁶ Jud ⁵⁷ Mishnah Avodah zarah ⁵⁸ Mishnah Avodah zarah ⁵⁹ Rav answers that even a house not built for worship becomes permanently forbidden as if it had been built as a pagan temple, if itself was worshipped. Babli 47b, Meˋilah ⁶⁰ One compares the rules concerning a pagan temple with those of a house dedicated to the Temple (Lev ⁶¹ Mishnah Parah ⁶² A vessel which is permanently fixed to the ground remains a vessel and can become forbidden. ⁶³ A piece of loose rock which was cemented to the ground and then a trough was hewn from it does not become a vessel. Then why should a house become forbidden by being worshipped since it becomes a house only after being connected to the ground? ⁶⁴ It is true that a finished house not built as a temple cannot become forbidden. But if the finished stones for a stone building were worshipped before being cemented in the house they already are forbidden and do not become permitted by use as building blocks. ⁶⁵ The statement of R. Simeon ben Laqish and the opposing statement of R. Joḥanan only refer to situations where it is not clear whether the idol can be restored or not. ⁶⁶ Mishnah Avodah zarah ⁶⁷ Then each individual stone remains forbidden; there is no contradiction to the Mishnah. ⁶⁸ Babli Meˋilah ⁵⁹ Rav answers that even a house not built for worship becomes permanently forbidden as if it had been built as a pagan temple, if itself was worshipped. Babli 47b, Meˋilah ⁶⁹ This refers to a holy tree which is worshipped as Ashera

Levi said, one who worships a house makes it forbidden⁵⁹ 20a., a cave he does not make forbidden⁷⁰. What is [the difference] between a house and a cave? Rebbi Ḥanania the son of Rebbi Hillel said, a house was separated at some time; a cave never was separated.

footnotes: ⁵⁹ Rav answers that even a house not built for worship becomes permanently forbidden as if it had been built as a pagan temple, if itself was worshipped. Babli 47b, Meˋilah ⁷⁰ Even if the cave was excavated for purposes of idol worship it does not lose its character as real estate.

MISHNAH: From where that a ship is pure⁴? For it is said⁵. 30:19., the way of a ship in the heart of the Sea. From where that a garden bed that is six by six hand-breadths one may sow with five kinds of seeds, four at its four sides and one in the middle⁶, the prohibition to grow different kinds of produce on the same field. Different kinds if grown on parallel fields must be separated by an uncultivated strip, but such fields may touch one another at a single point. The minimum size of a plot that can be planted with several kinds is a 6-by-6 hand-breadths plot, cf. Mishnah Kilaim 3:1 Notes 1–2; the configuration envisaged by the Mishnah is shown there in fig. 3–1. It is suggested that one divide the plot into 36 squares of one hand-breadth edge length each. Along the four edges, the corner squares are left fallow. Then on each edge, a rectangle, 4 long and 1 wide, can be planted. These 4 rectangles may be planted with 4 different kinds since they meet only at a pair of vertical angles. Together, they contain 16 of the 1-by-1 squares. The interior edges of the rectangles enclose a 4-by-4 square. In this square, a square can be planted in the shape of a diamond, having its vertices at the midpoints of the inner edges of the rectangles. This is permitted as רֹאשׁ תּוֹר. The diagonals of the diamond have length 4; it covers exactly half of the internal square of 16 square hand-breadths. Hence, the entire cultivated area is 8 + 16 = 24 hand-breadths square. [If instead we assume that the fallow squares at the corners have edge length a, then the total cultivated area, in square handbreadths, is f(a) = 4a(6 - 2a) + 0.5(6 - 2a)². A simple computation then shows that the maximum is attained for a = 1, f(1) = 24. One third of the total area must lie fallow.]? For it is said⁷. 61:11., for like the earth it will bring out its plants and like a garden it will cause it to grow its sown seeds.

footnotes: ⁴ While a ship is a vessel, it is not subject to the impurity of vessels. This not only applies to large vessels which are not subject to impurity if they are so large that they cannot be moved by a single human empty or loaded but even small boats if they are never used on land. ⁵ Prov ⁶ The problem is that of kilaim ⁷ Is

HALAKHAH: 2⁷¹. Did you have to learn from the sea⁷², just as the sea is pure so also the ship is pure? Did you not learn this from the sack⁷³. 11:32 where impurity of implements is introduced. These are described as wooden vessels, or textiles, or leather, or a sack, or anything used in work. This is read to mean that containers are subject to impurity only if they can be handled like a sack; i. e., transported by a human both empty and filled. Usually a ship is too large to be handled in this way.? The sack may be used both on sea and on dry land; a ship can be used on sea but cannot be used on dry land⁷⁴. The rabbis of Caesarea say, this is about a clay vessel. Since the sack teaches only about what is written in the paragraph⁷⁵. 11:32; the rules for these must be derived from other sources which, however, do not lend themselves to interpretation based on size., this excludes clay vessels which are not mentioned in the paragraph so that the sack could have taught about it

footnotes: ⁷¹ Here starts the discussion of Mishnah 2. Babli 83b. ⁷² It is very irregular to derive halakhic principles from the Hagiographs since the only admitted source is the Pentateuch. ⁷³ The basic verse is Lev ⁷⁴ This is a first argument to deny that a comparison with a sack is possible in this case. ⁷⁵ Clay vessels are not mentioned in Lev

⁷⁶ 3:1 (Notes 6–18,כ). In the copy here, an essential sentence was omitted by the scribe. On the other hand, the spelling here is somewhat more careful than in Kilaim.*Its sown seeds: the minimum of seeds are two⁷⁷ but its seedlings. The verse uses a plural for the seedlings in a garden( interpreted as one garden bed); this proves only that it is possible to sow more than one kind.. Rebbi Samuel bar Sisarta said, from two you infer four. Just as for two you start at the beginning of six and reduce continuously, so for four you start at the beginning of six and reduce continuously. It is impossible⁷⁸ that there should not be a free space to plant in the middle⁷⁹ 2:8 Note 120) prohibit to grow one kind of produce on a field surrounded by four fields on which other kinds are grown and therefore require that at the corners squares of one hand-breadth each must be empty. In order to grow two kinds of plants, one may sow two strips, each 4 hand-breadths long, along parallel edges, each one 2.25 hand-breadths wide, so that the required separation of 1.5 hand-breadths be observed in the middle. But then the argument may be used also for the other two edges. This means that one sows four triangular patches; each one has a base of 4 hand-breadths on an edge of the garden bed, with base angles of 45°. These triangles must be separated by strips 1.5 hand-breadths wide. This means that at the edges, we must leave a square of edge length a empty, whose diagonal is 1.5 = a2. Hence, a = 1.061; the bases of the triangle can only be 3.878 hand-breadths. In that case, the distance of the third vertex of the triangle from its base is equal to half the base on the edge, or 1.939 hand-breadths. The distance from the center is a = 1.061 1.5. In order to plant a single seed in the middle, it is therefore necessary to cut off the triangles at distance 1.5 from center and edge, creating four congruent trapezoids. The height of a trapezoid is h=1.5, its base 2*b=3.878. By similar triangles, the length t of its top is given by 2b/b = t/(b-h) or t = 0.878. That makes it possible to plant a single fifth kind in a small space in the middle. The total area planted amounts to four times the area of the trapezoids, 15.044 square hand-breadths, plus the area of the small space in the middle.. Rebbi Jonah said, working space joins working space but a kind does not meet another kind to jail it⁸⁰. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Its seed, its seeds, its sown seeds⁸¹., that the verse itself implies more than 2 kinds. The word זרוע appears only twice in the Bible, Is. 61:11 and in a description of grain (Lev. 11:37): seeds of seedlings that may be sown. In contrast to modern dictionaries which take זרוע as a word different from זרע, the authors here take it as expansion of זרע “seed.” The root is expanded three times, by taking the plural, adding a possessive suffix, and adding the letter ו. Each change is taken as a plural, hence three plurals are added for a total of six units.. That follows Rebbi Jehudah, since Rebbi Jehudah said six, seed, its seed, its seeds, its sown seeds. Rebbi Ḥaggai said, זרעיה has five letters; everywhere I find ו I delete it⁸²3:1.. This was asked of Rebbi Ḥuna, the scribe of the assembly, and he said, זירועיה is written plene⁸³ by י is standard only in Mishnaic and later texts, not in Biblical ones. Hence, the plene writing refers to the masoretic spelling of the word; one has six letters, supporting Rebbi Jehudah.. Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Yannai: ⁸⁴[All inside of six⁸⁵. Cahana in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish:] All at the outside of six⁸⁶. Then we should state “nine!” Rebbi Tanḥum from Bostra said, that is true. But our Mishnah speaks of a garden bed in the middle of garden beds⁸⁷ 86b). Otherwise, it really is possible to sow 9 kinds, as the Babli puts it (Šabbat 86a), in the case of a garden bed planted on land otherwise dry, with no other beds nearby. Rav in the Babli still admits only five kinds even on dry land..

footnotes: ⁷⁶ The origin of this paragraph is in Kilaim ⁷⁷ It does not say, it will make to germinate its seedling ⁷⁸ The correct Yerushalmi form for “impossible”; the form אי אפשר in כ is Babylonian. ⁷⁹ The argument as explained by R. Simson: At the end of the paragraph, it is stated that one deals with a vegetable bed surrounded by other vegetable beds. The rules of “jailing” (Kilaim ⁸⁰ Each separate kind needs a working space around it, given by the strip of width 1.5 hand-breadths, but the same strip does serve two different kinds without problem. Also, the rules of “jailing” only apply to fields, not to garden beds. ⁸¹ Here starts a new approach, viz ⁸² R. Ḥaggai assumes that originally all Hebrew spelling was what is called defective. Hence, any ו or י that is neither part of the root nor required by grammatical rules is considered an addition by later scribes and therefore is disregarded. That eliminates the ו but leaves the י which is required as sign of plural. One ends up with five letters, following the anonymous opinion in Mishnah Kilaim ⁸³ The spelling זירעיה in the text is certainly wrong since the expression of ṣere ⁸⁴ Added from כ, needed by the context. ⁸⁵ All seeds are sown in the interior of the bed, away from the corners. ⁸⁶ The corners at the boundary, which are at the outside, are sown. Then one may sow four 1-by-l corner patches, four 1-by-l patches at the center of each edge, and a center diamond, for a total of nine patches. ⁸⁷ Since the rules of “jailing” apply to garden beds as a whole, not to smaller patches, the corners cannot be sown. This is the opinion of Samuel in the Babli (Šabbat

MISHNAH: From where that one⁸. 15:16–17 and sexual intercourse makes impure, v. 18. Semen which no longer can fertilize is not impure. The question is how long after intercourse must one suspect that semen released by the female still produces impurity? The answer which is given here states that semen may stay alive inside the woman’s body for three days. who loses semen on the third day is impure? For it is said⁹. 19:15., be prepared for three days, do not touch a woman. From where that one washes¹⁰ a baby on the third day if it falls on a Sabbath? For it is said¹¹. 34:25., it was on the third day when they hurt. From where that one ties a crimson band to the head of the scapegoat¹² 4:2 requires that a crimson band be tied to the horns of the goat sent to the cliff.? For it is said¹³. 1:18., if your sins were like scarlet they will be snow white, etc.

footnotes: ⁸ Human semen is impure (Lev ⁹ Ex ¹⁰ A male baby on the third day after circumcision with warm water, heated for the purpose even on the Sabbath, because it is a medical necessity. The entire series of deductions from Scripture is introduced here because of this rule of the Sabbath. ¹¹ Gen ¹² Mishnah Yoma ¹³ Is

HALAKHAH: 3. ⁸⁸ 8:3, quoted in the next paragraph, to which the present is an introduction. Rebbi Joḥanan said, they learned from Sinai⁸⁹ 19.. Moses came down on the third day of the week⁹⁰ and told them, be prepared for three days, do not approach a woman⁹¹. 19:15.. For any one who separated on the third day, there is (the third)⁹², the night of the fourth, and the fourth, the night of the fifth, and the fifth. On the sixth, if she ejected in the night she was impure, during the day pure⁹³ without problems.. For any one who separated on the fourth day, there is the fourth, the night of the fifth, and the fifth. On the sixth, if she ejected in the night she was impure, during the day pure⁹⁴ 8:3.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, this was on Sinai. But for future generations either four or six⁹⁵ 8:3.; Rebbi Aqiba says, forever there are five, also for future generations.

footnotes: ⁸⁸ Here starts discussion of Mishnah 3, although the reference is not to the statement of R. Aqiba in that Mishnah but to Mishnah Miqwaot ⁸⁹ The rules of impurity of semen lost by a woman days after intercourse are derived from Ex. ⁹⁰ Tuesday. In this interpretation there were three days of preparation and the revelation on Sinai took place on the Sabbath. If one deletes “of the week”, the reference is to the day of the Month. ⁹¹ Ex ⁹² This word was written by the scribe, then (wrongly) deleted by the corrector, and therefore missing in the printed editions. ⁹³ The times elapsed in the matter of women’s purity are always counted in “terms” of 12 hours each. If a woman had sex in the night from Monday to Tuesday, then six terms have elapsed by Friday, and she can purify herself in a miqweh ⁹⁴ In this case, four terms have elapsed, as stated as possibility by R. Ismael in Mishnah Miqwaot ⁹⁵ Mishnah Miqwaot

There⁹⁶ 8:3., we have stated: “One who loses semen⁸. 15:16–17 and sexual intercourse makes impure, v. 18. Semen which no longer can fertilize is not impure. The question is how long after intercourse must one suspect that semen released by the female still produces impurity? The answer which is given here states that semen may stay alive inside the woman’s body for three days. on the third day is pure, the words of Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah⁹⁷. Rebbi Ismael says, sometimes they are four terms, sometimes they are five, sometimes they are six⁹⁸. Rebbi Aqiba says, always they are five⁹⁹. If part of the first term had elapsed, one completes it by the sixth term¹⁰⁰.” Therefore Rebbi Ismael makes the day one term and the night one term; Rebbi Aqiba makes the day one term and the night one term. In what do they differ? They differ in complete terms. Rebbi Ismael treats part of a term like the whole, but Rebbi Aqiba does not treat part of a term like the whole. It was stated so about Rebbi Aqiba: “Therefore if part of the first term had elapsed, one completes it by the sixth term”¹⁰¹. It was stated: Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah says, day and night each are a term, and part of a term is like the whole. It was stated so about Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah: Sometimes after slightly more than a day she is pure; sometimes after slightly less than two days she is impure. How does it happen that after slightly more than a day she is pure? She had intercourse Friday afternoon before sundown and lost Saturday night after nightfall; there is slightly more than a day she is pure¹⁰². How does it happen that after slightly less than two days she is impure? She had intercourse Friday night after sundown and lost Sunday night before nightfall; there is slightly less than two days she is impure¹⁰³. Rebbi Joḥanan said, from the words of all of them, Israel received the Torah as immersed on the same day¹⁰⁴, the purification occurs in two stages. Impurity is removed by immersion in a miqweh but purity is acquired only at sundown (Lev. 22:6–7). In the meantime, the ṭevul yom person does not contaminate anything by his touch but is not permitted any sanctified food (cf. Berakhot 1:1 Note 3).. That is, the women; but the men already were purified. What is the reason? Sanctify them today and tomorrow and let them wash their garments¹⁰⁵. 19:10. A man may immerse himself immediately after intercourse and become completely pure after the next sundown.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, these are the words of Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah, and Rebbi Ismael, and Rebbi Aqiba. But the word of the Sages is, up to three days; after that it decayed. This parallels what Rebbi Zeˋira said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: This are the instructions for the sufferer from gonorrhea and from whom semen is ejaculated¹⁰⁶. 15:32.. Since the instructions of the sufferer from gonorrhea are based on three days¹⁰⁷ 1:1)., also the instructions for semen are up to three days¹⁰⁸.

footnotes: ⁹⁶ Mishnah Miqwaot ⁸ Human semen is impure (Lev ⁹⁷ As explained later in the Halakhah, he strictly goes by the count of days, not measuring the time elapsed. ⁹⁸ He essentially accepts R. Eleazar ben Azariah’s interpretation; only he quantifies it in “terms”. A term is either a night, from sundown to sunrise, or a day, from sunrise to sundown. Six terms are required if the woman had intercourse at sundown or sunrise, when it is not clear whether ejaculation occurred before or after the start of a new term. ⁹⁹ In fact he always requires 60 hours elapsed after ejaculation. ¹⁰⁰ This sentence is not in the Mishnah mss., but since it also is quoted in the Babli 86a as appendix to this Mishnah and clarifies the statement of R. Aqiba, it should be considered part of the Mishnah. ¹⁰¹ In order to complete the 60 hrs. required by R. Aqiba. The computation of R. Ismael is the same as that of R. Eleazar ben Azariah explained in the sequel. ¹⁰² For R. Eleazar ben Azariah the day of intercourse is day 1; she is pure if she loses some semen on day 3. The day starts at sundown. Let ε be a small fraction. If she had intercourse ε hours before sundown and then lost semen the next evening ε hours after sundown it already is the third day and she is pure after 24+2 ε hours. ¹⁰³ If she had intercourse ε hours after sundown then the next 24 - ε still are day 1; if she loses semen ε hours before the end of day 2 she still is impure even though 48 – 2ε hrs. have elapsed. ¹⁰⁴ Babli 86b. For profane matters, a person either is pure or impure. But for sancta ¹⁰⁵ Ex ¹⁰⁶ Lev ¹⁰⁷ A sufferer from gonorrhea is impure, but he becomes severely impure requiring purification in flowing water only if he had three emissions within a three-day period (Mishnah Zavim ¹⁰⁸ Babli 86b. While the day of intercourse is counted as day 1, the woman does not become impure by losing semen only on day 4. The derivation of these laws from Sinai is rejected since before the theophany at Sinai the people were not obligated to follow the rules promulgated there.Here starts a Genizah fragment edited by L. Ginzberg (p. 87–88), G.

¹⁰⁹ 80(8), on Gen. 43:25. We have stated: “One washes the baby.” It was stated in the House of (Rav) [Rebbi]¹¹⁰: “One washes the circumcision.”¹¹¹ Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Practice follows him who says, “one washes the baby”¹¹². Rebbi Yose said, you are forced to say, one washes the baby. ¹¹³ Samuel stated, one never witholds either oil or warm water from a wound on the Sabbath. Rebbi Yose said, my teacher Rebbi Zeˋira always was saying to me, state in your Mishnah, not only this but one sprinkles warm water on a wound on the Sabbath. If you are saying, “one washes the circumcision”, what is the difference between an adult and a baby?

footnotes: ¹⁰⁹ This paragraph and the next really are not about Mishnah 9:3 but Mishnah 19:3, which is quoted in the first sentence. The text there was omitted by the scribe and added by the corrector, whose text (19) seems to be a copy of the text here, only slightly careless at the end. In addition to G, there also is a slightly enlarged version in Gen. rabba ¹¹⁰ The text in (parentheses) is from the ms., the one in [brackets] from G and 19 seems to be the correct one; cf. Tosephta 15:4. ¹¹¹ But not the entire body of a newly circumcised baby. ¹¹² Babli 134b. ¹¹³ All this is R. Yose’s argument that in Mishnah 19:3 one must state “the baby” since for “the circumcision” the statement would be superfluous.

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar. Practice follows Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah¹¹⁴. Rebbi Abbin in the name of Rebbi Abbahu, the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah: it was on the third day when they hurt¹¹. 34:25.. It does not say, “when it hurt”, but when they hurt, at a time when all their limbs hurt them. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Joḥanan ordered for the women having newborns, that all treatments which you give on a weekday should be given on the Sabbath. This is necessary for the case that the third day falls on a Sabbath. Samuel said, because of the danger. Rebbi Yose asked, if it is because of the danger one heats hot water for him¹¹⁵! Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of the rabbis there: One heats hot water for him. And it was stated thus: A person heats a linen cloth and puts it on (a wound) (his belly)¹¹⁶; G has a lacuna at this place. The second version is that of 19 and the Babli (40b). on the Sabbath¹¹⁷. A person may not take a bottle full of hot water and put it on his belly on the Sabbath. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, on the contrary it is permitted.¹¹⁸

footnotes: ¹¹⁴ Who states in Mishnah 19:3 that on the third day after circumcision the boy is considered in mortal danger and therefore everything necessary for his care must be done on the Sabbath. Babli 134b. ¹¹ Gen ¹¹⁵ If there is danger one has to do everything necessary; there seems to be no need to single out heating water. ¹¹⁶ The first version is that of the ms. and Gen. r. ¹¹⁷ Tosephta 3:7. ¹¹⁸ Babli 40b.

¹¹⁹ 6:6, half of which was tied to the cliff from which the scapegoat was pushed down. The first paragraph is a baraita also reproduced in the Babli, Yoma 67a, Roš Haššanah 31b. Both paragraphs are copied (the second incompletely) in Yoma 6:5 (ו). Originally they were tying it to their windows; some of them were turning white and some turning red; these were ashamed in front of the others. They changed and tied it to the door of the Sanctuary. Some years it was turning white, in others turning red. They changed and tied it to the rock.

footnotes: ¹¹⁹ This is the discussion of the last part of Mishnah 3, the crimson band which was tied to the head of the scapegoat, or, as noted in Mishnah Yoma

It is written¹³. 1:18., let us go and argue, says the Eternal, etc. It was stated, Rebbi Eliezer said, If your sins were like years¹²⁰. 31:21, Midrash Mishle (ed. S. Buber, p. 110, Note ל) reads the word as שְׁנַיִם “two, double”. The only rabbinic source which recognizes שָׁנִים as “scarlet” is in Midrash Mishle (loc. cit. p. 112)., etc., like the years from Heaven to Earth¹²¹ 1:1, Note 83., they will be snow white; more than that, they shall be like wool. Rebbi Joshua said, if your sins were like years, like the years of the patriarchs, they will be snow white; more than that, they shall be like wool. Rebbi Yudan bar Pazi said, If your sins were like years they will be snow white, the first time, if they were like purple they shall be like wool, the second time. But the rabbis said, If the sins of a person are like his years, they will be snow white; more than that, they shall be like wool. Rebbi Yudan Antordiyya said, at a time when a person’s sins are light, they will be snow white; at a time when they are serious, they shall be like wool.

footnotes: ¹³ Is ¹²⁰ The plural שָׁנִים is derived from שָׁנָה “year”, not from שָׁנִי “scarlet”. For the other occurrence in Prov ¹²¹ The numbers given by RR. Eliezer and R. Joshua are identical, 500. Cf. Berakhot

MISHNAH: From where that anointing is like drinking on the Day of Atonement¹⁴? Even though it is no proof, there is a hint, as it is said¹⁵. 109:18., it came like water into him and like oil in his bones.

footnotes: ¹⁴ The biblical commandment on the Day of Atomement is “to deprive oneself”. It is understood that this includes fasting. Not anointing here is declared a derivative of the commandment not to drink. ¹⁵ Ps

HALAKHAH: ¹²² 2:1 (Notes 28–35, ג) and Taˋanit 1:6 (ד). The Genizah text starts again at the end of the paragraph.4. “From where that anointing,” etc. As we have stated: On the Sabbath both anointing for pleasure and anointing not for pleasure are permitted. On the Day of Atonement, both anointing for pleasure and anointing not for pleasure are forbidden. On the Ninth of Av and public fasts¹²³, anointing for pleasure is forbidden but anointing not for pleasure are permitted.

footnotes: ¹²² This refers to the last part of Mishnah 4. The matter is only marginally related to the rules of the Sabbath; the full text is preserved in Maˋaser Šeni ¹²³ Fasts in a winter of drought, whose rules are modeled on those for the Ninth of Av.

It was stated: Anointing is equal to drinking regarding prohibition and reparation but not punishment¹²⁴. On the day of Atonement regarding prohibition but not punishment¹²⁵. But was it not stated, they shall not desecrate¹²⁶. 22:15. The verse refers to the non-Cohen who “eats” holy food in error. Babli Niddah 32a., to include him who anoints or drinks? Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no “anoints” there. Rebbi Abba Mari said, if there is no “anoints” there is no “drinks”. For if it were not so, do matters combine which come from two different prohibitions¹²⁷. is needed to subsume drinking under eating, it is incomprehensible that for inadvertently eating and drinking together on the Day of Atonement one should be responsible only for one sacrifice since in that case, one infringes on two separate biblical prohibitions and should be liable for two separate sacrifices. Similarly, if one illegimately ate and drank heave one should be liable for two separate fifths. Since in both cases the Mishnah treats eating and drinking together, the verse cannot express a separate status for drinking; the addition of anointing and drinking is rabbinic interpretation but not biblical law and there is no reason to exclude anointing.? From where that there is a clear commandment¹²⁸? Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Simai: I did not give from it to the dead¹²⁹. 26:14.. Where do we hold? If not to bring a casket or shrouds for him, this is forbidden for the living, therefore certainly for the dead. What is permitted for the living but prohibited for the dead?¹³⁰ Deut. 302. I am saying that this is anointing¹³¹.

footnotes: ¹²⁴ Referring to illegal use of heave and dedicated food by non-Cohanim and its replacement by 5/4 of the value taken. ¹²⁵ The only biblical prohibitions on the Day of Atonement are eating, drinking, and working. The other two, anointing and sexual relations, are rabbinic and not subject to biblical punishment. ¹²⁶ Lev ¹²⁷ If the verse in Lev ¹²⁸ While illegitimate use of heave oil for anointing is prohibited, it is mentioned in the framework of the farmer’s declaration in the Temple, which is a positive commandment. Overstepping the prohibition of anointing when it is forbidden legally is overstepping a positive commandment not under the scope of biblical penal law. ¹²⁹ Deut ¹³⁰ Cf. Sifry ¹³¹ Only consuming Second Tithe is permitted.

MISHNAH: One who brings out wood to cook an easily cooked egg, spices to spice an easily cooked egg, and these combine one with the other¹⁶. Shells of walnuts, skins of pomegranates, isatis, and madder to dye a small tissue like a hair net¹⁷. Soda, and soap, Cimolian earth¹⁸, and potash, to wash a small tissue like a hair net; Rebbi Jehudah says, to use on a stain¹⁹..

footnotes: ¹⁶ Even though it was stated at the end of Chapter Seven that matters which are under different minimal amounts for the Sabbath are not combined and the volume of firewood needed to cook an egg certainly is much larger than the volume of spices used for the egg, the rule “enough to cook an easily cooked egg” is the same in both cases and this is sufficient to declare the rules identical. ¹⁷ Crochet work or knitted hair covers have little material and need little dye. ¹⁸ Κιμωλία (γῆ), ἡ, a white clay like fuller’s earth, used in baths and medicine. The Halakhah presumes different readings for some of the substances mentioned here. ¹⁹ Enough to eliminate a blood stain from a woman’s period to allow the garment to be purified in a miqweh

HALAKHAH: 5. This is difficult. May cumin and salt combine¹³²? Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: they taught this about sweeteners.

footnotes: ¹³² The Mishnah stated that all kinds of spices combine for the amount needed to cook a small egg. But for salt and cumin very different quantities are needed; this makes the statement indefinite. Babli 89b/90a.

There, we have stated:¹³³ “The measure for one who bleaches, who beats flax, or who dyes, or who spins,” and here you are saying so? The one who dyes, here one who brings out to dye¹³⁴.

footnotes: ¹³³ Mishnah 13:4. ¹³⁴ The amount noted in Mishnah 9:5 is much smaller than than given in Mishnah 13:4. The activities in question are not comparable.

נֶתֶר is νίτρον. בִּירִית is קְימוּן .בִּירִיתָה is kali. אָֽשְׁלָג, Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, אצרות רוח.¹³⁵ is the plant, saltwort, or its ashes. בִּירִיתָה must be a plant used in the manufacture of soap; the identity of אצרות רוח (if the word is spelled correctly) is everybody’s guess. In the Babli 90a, for בִּירִיתָה one reads כבריתא “sulfur”; this identification is rejected there and replaced by “aloe”. It seems that here also the materials are of vegetal origin.

footnotes: ¹³⁵ The technical terms for cleaning materials are explained, νίτρον is soda, kali

MISHNAH: Pepper²⁰ in any amount, ˋiṭran²¹ in any amount, spices and metals²² in any amount. Of the altar’s dust, of the altar’s stones, of rot of scrolls, of rot of their bindings the most minute amount since one collects them to hide them away²³. Rebbi Jehudah says, also one who takes out the most minute amount of appurtenances of idol worship, as it is said²⁴. 13:18., nothing of the ban shall cling to your hand.

footnotes: ²⁰ Rashi holds that פִּלְפֶּלֶת are green peppers in contrast to פִּלְפֶּל which is black pepper. ²¹ Probably pine sap. ²² Metal bars. ²³ Because of their intrinsic sanctity, once they become damaged and no longer usable they must be buried. Since they never can be discarded, even a minuscule amount is valuable. ²⁴ Deut

HALAKHAH: 6. ¹³⁶ It was stated: Also bad smell in any amount. Rebbi Ila said, also Rebbi Simeon agrees to this. Rebbi Simeon agrees in cases of prohibitions of usufruct.

footnotes: ¹³⁶ The entire text is repeated in Chapter 10, to Mishnah 6. The first assertion also is in the Babli, 90a. If R. Simeon agrees in case of prohibitions of usufruct, the question remains why the statement in Mishnah 6 about idolatry was formulated as a minority opinion of R. Jehudah. On the other hand, since items prohibited for usufruct never can be transported for a legitimate purpose, if R. Simeon would not agree then there would be a general permission to move such items.

MISHNAH: One who takes out a peddler’s bag, even though it contains many kinds, is liable only for one purification sacrifice²⁵. Garden seeds less than the volume of a dried fig; Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra said, five. Green melon²⁶1:2, Note 38. In modern Hebrew the word means “zucchini”. seeds two, squash seeds two, Egyptian bean seeds two. A live locust in any amount, dead in the volume of a dried fig. A vineyard bird²⁷ 5(9), permitted as food. either live or dead in any amount since one keeps it as medicine. Rebbi Jehudah says, also one who brings out a dead locust²⁸ in the most minute amount since one keeps it as a toy for children.

footnotes: ²⁵ Since it is a single act. ²⁶ Cf. Kilaim ²⁷ A kind of locust; according to Sifra Šemini Pereq ²⁸ A locust forbidden as food.

HALAKHAH: 7. It is difficult. If he continues to bring out in one forgetting, is he not liable only once¹³⁷? For whom is it necessary? For Rebbi Eliezer¹³⁸ 3:10 states that repeated identical acts in one period of oblivion may trigger many liabilities. Cf. Chapter 7, Note 48 ff.. That you should not say, many kinds should be treated like as many forgettings and he would be liable for each single one. Therefore it was necessary to say that he is liable only once.

footnotes: ¹³⁷ This refers to the statement in Mishnah 7 that taking out a pedlar’s box creates only one liability. Since only one item was taken out, even if it contains many kinds, it is difficult to see why the statement is needed. ¹³⁸ Who in Mishnah Keritut

“Garden seeds less than the volume of a dried fig; Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra said, five.” What is Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra’s reason? Because this is what one usually sows in a garden bed.

“Green melon²⁶1:2, Note 38. In modern Hebrew the word means “zucchini”. seeds two, squash seeds two, Egyptian bean seeds two.” It was stated: Median wheat two¹³⁹. Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira: Because wheat was so much in esteem they treated it like garden vegetables which are not eaten.

footnotes: ²⁶ Cf. Kilaim ¹³⁹ Chapter 7, Note 225. The paragraph also is copied in Chapter 12, Note 55 (13).

“A live locust in the most minute amount, dead in the volume of a dried fig..” That means, if it is pure¹⁴⁰ 11:22.. But if it is impure, a dog’s mouthful.

footnotes: ¹⁴⁰ Permitted as food, Lev.

“A vineyard bird²⁷ 5(9), permitted as food. either live or dead in any amount since one keeps it as medicine.” Rebbi Aḥa said, for a woman with rough skin rubs in with it and she is healed. There, they said, a person who wants to renounce sexual activity eats half of it and keeps half of it. The left hand part is forbidden, the right hand part is permitted. If anything was lost or missing he has no recourse ever¹⁴¹. What should he do? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, he preserves it¹⁴² in a honey flask.

footnotes: ²⁷ A kind of locust; according to Sifra Šemini Pereq ¹⁴¹ He can never regain his potency. ¹⁴² He has to preserve the other part permanently. Probably eating this other part would restore his potency. Babylonian medical instructions are not of the rational kind.

“Rebbi Jehudah says, also one who brings out a dead locust²⁸ in the most minute amount.” Therefore pure in the amount of a dried fig whether alive or dead¹⁴³. Rebbi Jehudah follows his own opinion since Rebbi Jehudah says one does not play with pure food. But is there not written¹⁴⁴ 40:29, speaking of the Behemoth., would you play with him as with a bird? Is it not permitted out of a prohibition¹⁴⁵? But is it not written, as with a bird¹⁴⁶ 1:1, Note 29.? Rebbi Mattaniah said, since it is lacking slaughter it is as if impure¹⁴⁷ 9a)..

footnotes: ²⁸ A locust forbidden as food. ¹⁴³ He disagrees with the anonymous statement earlier in the Mishnah. ¹⁴⁴ Job ¹⁴⁵ It is indeterminate whether the Behemoth is pure or impure. ¹⁴⁶ There is an opinion that צִפּוֹר in general means an edible bird, cf. Nazir ¹⁴⁷ Any animal or bird is forbidden as food unless it is known that it was slaughtered correctly (Babli Ḥulin