Megillah 16

שומרת יום כנגד יום תוכיח שמטמאה משכב ומושב ואינה טעונה ספירת שבעה

This argument can be confuted by the case of the woman who is keeping day for day who defiles bed and seat but does not count seven days. And thus do not be surprised that this one also, although he defiles bed and seat, might not be obligated to count seven days.

ואף אתה אל תתמה על זה שאע"פ שמטמא משכב ומושב לא יהא טעון ספירת שבעה תלמוד לומר מזובו וספר מקצת זובו וספר לימד על זב בעל שתי ראיות שטעון ספירת שבעה

So then you should not be astonished about this, that even though he defiles a couch or a seat he is not required to count seven [days]. The teaching says "from his discharge he shall count". In some cases, 'from his discharge he shall count' teaches about the zav who sees two [discharges], that he is required to count seven [days].

אמר ליה רב פפא לאביי מאי שנא האי מזובו דמרבי ביה זב בעל שתי ראיות ומאי שנא האי מזובו דממעט ביה זב בעל שתי ראיות

Rav Pappa said to Abaye: What changes this 'from his discharge' that it includes 'a zav who sees two [discharges]'? And what changes this 'from his discharge' that it excludes 'a zav who sees two [discharges]'?

אמר ליה אי סלקא דעתך האי למעוטי הוא דאתא לישתוק קרא מיניה וכי תימא אתיא מדינא שומרת יום כנגד יום תוכיח

He replied: If you would think that that text is for the purpose of excluding, then the text could simply omit the word. And should you say, we could then derive the rule [that he is to count seven days] by a logical deduction, such a deduction could be confuted by the case of the woman who counts day for day.

וכי תימא האי מיבעי ליה מזובו ולא מנגעו א"כ ליכתוב קרא וכי יטהר הזב ולישתוק מזובו למה לי לימד על זב בעל שתי ראיות שטעון ספירת שבעה:

And should you say that this word is required to show that the text refers to one who is cleansed of his issue [only] and not [of his issue and] his leprosy. If so let the verse say, “And when he that has an issue is cleansed” and no more. Why do I have “from his issue”? This teaches that one with an issue who has two observations is required to count seven days.

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> אין בין מצורע מוסגר למצורע מוחלט אלא פריעה ופרימה

There is no difference between a metzora who is under observation and one declared to be a definite metzora except the disheveling of hair and tearing the clothes.

אין בין טהור מתוך הסגר לטהור מתוך החלט אלא תגלחת וצפרים:

There is no difference between a metzora who has been declared clean after being under observation and one who has been declared clean after having been a definite metzorah except shaving and [sacrificing] the birds.

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> הא לענין שילוח [וטומאה] זה וזה שוין

Gemara. But regarding being sent out [from the camp] [and defilement] this one and that one are equal.

מנהני מילי דתני רב שמואל בר יצחק קמיה דרב הונא (ויקרא יג, ו) וטהרו הכהן מספחת היא וכבס בגדיו וטהר טהור מפריעה ופרימה דמעיקרא

From where is this thing? As Rav Shmuel bar Yitzhak taught standing near Rav Huna: (Leviticus 13:6): "And the priest will pronounce him clean, it is a sore (other than leprosy); and he shall wash his clothes, and he is clean." He was clean from the start regarding letting hair grow and rending a garment.

א"ל רבא אלא מעתה גבי זב דכתיב (ויקרא טו, ה) וכבס בגדיו וטהר התם מאי וטהר מעיקרא איכא

Rava said to him. If that is so, then in regard to a zav of whom it is written, “And he shall wash his garments and be clean”, how is it possible to say that he shall have been clean from the outset?

אלא טהור השתא מלטמא כלי חרס בהיסט אע"ג דהדר חזי לא מטמא למפרע

Rather, it means that he is clean now so far as not to defile earthenware vessels by moving them; and even if he observes [an issue] again, he does not defile them retrospectively.

ה"נ טהור [השתא מלטמא בביאה למפרע]

So too here, [the meaning is that] the metzora is clean now to the extent of not defiling retrospectively by his entrance.

אלא אמר רבא מהכא (ויקרא יג, מה) והצרוע אשר בו הנגע מי שצרעתו תלויה בגופו יצא זה שאין צרעתו תלויה בגופו אלא בימים

Rather, Rava said: From here (Leviticus 13:45): "And the leper in whom the affliction rests...", [which means] the one whose leprosy is contingent on his body rather than on days. This excludes one whose leprosy is not contingent on his body, but on days.

אמר ליה אביי אלא מעתה (ויקרא יג, מו) כל ימי אשר הנגע בו יטמא מי שצרעתו תלויה בגופו הוא דטעון שילוח ושאין צרעתו תלויה בגופו אין טעון שילוח

Abaye said to him: If that is so, then when it says, “All the days during which the plague is in him he shall be unclean” (Leviticus 13:46), are we to say that one whose scale disease is due to his state of body is required to be sent out of the camp, but one whose scale disease is not due to his state of body is not to be sent out of the camp?

וכי תימא הכי נמי והא קתני אין בין מצורע מוסגר למצורע מוחלט אלא פריעה ופרימה הא לענין שילוח ולטמויי בביאה זה וזה שוין

And should you reply that that is so, [how can this be] seeing that it states, There is no difference between a metzora who is under observation and one declared to be a definite metzora except the disheveling of hair and tearing the clothes., from which it may be inferred that in the matter of being sent out [of the camp] and defiling by entrance they are on the same footing?

א"ל ימי כל ימי לרבות מצורע מוסגר לשילוח

He said to him “the days” “All the days” this includes a metzora under observation within the rule of sending out [of the camp].

אי הכי תגלחת וצפרים מ"ט לא דקתני אין בין טהור מתוך הסגר לטהור מתוך החלט אלא תגלחת וצפרים

If that is the case, what is the reason that he is not required to shave and offer birds, as it states: There is no difference between a metzora who has been declared clean after being under observation and one who has been declared clean after having been a definite metzora except shaving and [sacrificing] the birds.

אמר אביי אמר קרא (ויקרא יד, ג) ויצא הכהן אל מחוץ למחנה והנה נרפא נגע הצרעת מי שצרעתו תלויה ברפואות יצא זה שאין צרעתו תלויה ברפואות אלא בימים:

Abaye replied: The verse says: “And the priest shall go forth out of the camp, and behold the plague of scale disease is healed in the metzora” (Leviticus 14:3); one whose scale disease is dependent upon healing, and excludes one whose scale disease is not dependent on healing but on days [of isolation].

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> אין בין ספרים לתפלין ומזוזות אלא שהספרים נכתבין בכל לשון ותפלין ומזוזות אינן נכתבות אלא אשורית

Mishnah. There is no difference between scrolls, tefillin, and mezuzahs except that scrolls may be written in any language, while tefillin and mezuzahs may not be written [in anything] but Assyrian script (i.e., Hebrew). (Assyrian script is the familiar Hebrew square character script. -- trans.)

רשב"ג אומר אף בספרים לא התירו שיכתבו אלא יוונית:

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Even with scrolls, they did not permit that they be written [in any foreign language] but Greek.

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> הא לתופרן בגידין ולטמא את הידים זה וזה שוין:

GEMARA. [From this we infer] that for requiring [the sheets] to be stitched with sinews and for defiling the hands they are the same.

וספרים נכתבין בכל לשון וכו': ורמינהו מקרא שכתבו תרגום ותרגום שכתבו מקרא וכתב עברי אינו מטמא את הידים עד שיכתבנו בכתב אשורית על הספר ובדיו

'But scrolls may be written in any language', etc. But this is a contradiction. Hebrew text that is written in Aramaic, or Aramaic text that is written in Hebrew, or if one wrote in [old] Hebrew [script]: there is no defilement of the hands until one writes it in Assyrian script upon a scroll with ink.

אמר רבא לא קשיא

Rava replied: There is no contradiction;