sized

Whole limbs [of the body] have no [restriction as to] size: even less than an olive-sized portion of a corpse or less than an olive-sized portion of nevelah (carrion), or less than a lentil-sized portion of a sheretz can defile, [each in the manner of] their respective defilements.

Whole limbs [of the body] have no [restriction as to] size: even less than an olive-sized portion of a corpse or less than an olive-sized portion of nevelah (carrion), or less than a lentil-sized portion of a sheretz can defile, [each in the manner of] their respective defilements.

Whole limbs [of the body] have no [restriction as to] size: even less than an olive-sized portion of a corpse or less than an olive-sized portion of nevelah (carrion), or less than a lentil-sized portion of a sheretz can defile, [each in the manner of] their respective defilements.

These things defile by overshadowing: a corpse, an olive-sized [portion of flesh] of a corpse, an olive-sized [portion] of nezel, a ladleful of corpse-mold, the spine or the skull, [a] full limb of a corpse, or [a full] limb [severed] from a living person with the appropriate amount of flesh, a quarter [of a kav] of bones from the structural majority or numerical majority, and the structural majority or numerical majority [of the bones] of a corpse even though they do not amount to a quarter [of a kab]; [all these] are unclean. How many [bones] form the numerical majority? One hundred and twenty-five.

These things defile by overshadowing: a corpse, an olive-sized [portion of flesh] of a corpse, an olive-sized [portion] of nezel, a ladleful of corpse-mold, the spine or the skull, [a] full limb of a corpse, or [a full] limb [severed] from a living person with the appropriate amount of flesh, a quarter [of a kav] of bones from the structural majority or numerical majority, and the structural majority or numerical majority [of the bones] of a corpse even though they do not amount to a quarter [of a kab]; [all these] are unclean. How many [bones] form the numerical majority? One hundred and twenty-five.

[The following likewise defile:]A quarter [of a log] of blood, A quarter [of a log] of mixed blood from one corpse. Rabbi Akiva says: [even] from two corpses. [With regard to] the blood of a child that has completely flowed forth: Rabbi Akiva says: [it defiles] in even the smallest quantity, But the sages say: [there must be] a quarter [of a log]. [With regard to] an olive-sized [portion] of [corpse] worms whether alive or dead: Rabbi Eliezer declares [it] unclean, like the flesh, But the sages declare [it] clean. [With regard to] the ashes of burnt persons: Rabbi Eliezer says: the [minimum] quantity [for defilement is] a quarter [of a kav]. But the sages declare [them to be] clean. A ladleful and [a little] more of grave-dust is unclean. Rabbi Shimon declares [it to be] clean. A ladleful of corpse-mold mixed with water is not [regarded as] joined [into one mass] for [the purposes of] defilement.

These are clean if they are deficient: An olive-sized [portion] of a corpse; An olive-sized [portion] of nezel, A ladleful of corpse-mold, A quarter [of a log] of blood, A bone of the size of a barley-corn, And a limb [severed] from a living person, the bone of which [limb] is deficient.

These are clean if they are deficient: An olive-sized [portion] of a corpse; An olive-sized [portion] of nezel, A ladleful of corpse-mold, A quarter [of a log] of blood, A bone of the size of a barley-corn, And a limb [severed] from a living person, the bone of which [limb] is deficient.

How so? If the corpse was outside and its hair inside, the house is unclean. [With regard to] a bone which had upon it an olive-sized portion of flesh, if one brought part of it within so that the house was overshadowing it, [the house] is unclean. [With regard to] two bones which had upon them two pieces of flesh, [each] the size of half an olive, if one brought part of them within so that the house was overshadowing them, [the house] is unclean. But if [the pieces of flesh] were set into [the bone] by a person, the house is clean since connections created by human agency are not [regarded as] connections.

For an olive-sized portion of a corpse, an opening [in the room in which it is found] of one handbreadth [square], and for a [whole] corpse, an opening of four handbreadths [square, is enough] to prevent the uncleanness from [spreading to the other] openings; But for allowing the uncleanness to go out, an opening of one handbreadth [square is enough]. [A portion] greater than the size of an olive is as a [whole] corpse. Rabbi Yose says: [only] the spine and the skull are as a [whole] corpse.

A beehive [lying] in the doorway with its mouth [pointing] outside: If an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse were placed below the [part of the hive] which is outside [the house], Everything directly below or above that olive-sized [portion] becomes unclean; But everything that is not directly [below or above] that olive-sized [portion], or that which is within [the hive] or within the house, remains clean. [If the uncleanness is] within the house, nothing becomes unclean except that which is within the house. [If the uncleanness is] within [the hive] everything becomes unclean.

A beehive [lying] in the doorway with its mouth [pointing] outside: If an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse were placed below the [part of the hive] which is outside [the house], Everything directly below or above that olive-sized [portion] becomes unclean; But everything that is not directly [below or above] that olive-sized [portion], or that which is within [the hive] or within the house, remains clean. [If the uncleanness is] within the house, nothing becomes unclean except that which is within the house. [If the uncleanness is] within [the hive] everything becomes unclean.

A beehive [lying] in the doorway with its mouth [pointing] outside: If an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse were placed below the [part of the hive] which is outside [the house], Everything directly below or above that olive-sized [portion] becomes unclean; But everything that is not directly [below or above] that olive-sized [portion], or that which is within [the hive] or within the house, remains clean. [If the uncleanness is] within the house, nothing becomes unclean except that which is within the house. [If the uncleanness is] within [the hive] everything becomes unclean.

When do these rules apply? When the hive is a vessel and it is loosely placed in the door. If it is defective, although [it may be] stopped up with straw or it is stuck to the side of the door What is "stuck? Anything which has no opening of one handbreadth : Then, if an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse is placed below it, [everything] directly [below the portion] to the depths becomes unclean; [If placed] above [the hive everything] directly above to the sky becomes unclean. [If the uncleanness is] in the house, nothing becomes unclean except the house. [If the uncleanness is] within [the hive] nothing becomes unclean except that which is within [the hive].

When do these rules apply? When the mouth [of the hive is pointing] outwards If the mouth is [pointing] inwards [towards the house]: If an olive-sized portion of the corpse is placed below or above [that part of the hive which is] outside, everything directly below or above that olive-sized portion becomes unclean, and everything not directly [below or above it] and whatever is within [the hive] and the house, remains clean. [If the uncleanness is] within the hive or the house, everything becomes unclean.

When do these rules apply? When the mouth [of the hive is pointing] outwards If the mouth is [pointing] inwards [towards the house]: If an olive-sized portion of the corpse is placed below or above [that part of the hive which is] outside, everything directly below or above that olive-sized portion becomes unclean, and everything not directly [below or above it] and whatever is within [the hive] and the house, remains clean. [If the uncleanness is] within the hive or the house, everything becomes unclean.

When do these rules apply? When the hive is a vessel and it is loosely placed in the door. If it is defective, although [it may be] stopped up with straw or it is stuck to the side of the door What is "stuck? Anything which has no opening of one handbreadth : Then, if an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse is placed below it, [everything] directly [below the portion] to the depths becomes unclean; [If placed] above [the hive everything] directly above to the sky becomes unclean. [If the uncleanness is] in the house or in the hive, whatever is in the house or hive becomes unclean.

If it was lying on its side in the open air: If an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse was placed below it or above it, everything directly below or above the olive-sized [portion] becomes unclean; but everything that is not directly below or above, and what is within [the hive] remains clean. [If the uncleanness is] within [the hive] everything becomes unclean.

If it was lying on its side in the open air: If an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse was placed below it or above it, everything directly below or above the olive-sized [portion] becomes unclean; but everything that is not directly below or above, and what is within [the hive] remains clean. [If the uncleanness is] within [the hive] everything becomes unclean.

[In the case where the hive is in the open air] and is one handbreadth high off the ground, if there is uncleanness below it or above it, everything becomes unclean except the inside. [If the uncleanness is] within, everything becomes unclean. When do these rules apply? When [the hive is] a vessel. If it is defective, although [it may be] stopped up with straw or according to the sages, it contains forty seahs Then if an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse is placed below it, [everything] directly [below] to the depths becomes unclean; [If placed] above, [everything] directly above to the sky becomes unclean. [If the uncleanness is] is within [the hive] nothing is unclean except that which is within. [If] it was one handbreadth high off the ground, if there was uncleanness below it, what is below becomes unclean; [If the uncleanness] was within it, what is within becomes unclean; Above it, [everything] directly [above] to the sky becomes unclean.

A jar resting on its bottom in the open air: If an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse is placed beneath it or within it directly [above] its bottom, the uncleanness cleaves upwards and downwards, and the jar becomes unclean. [If the uncleanness is] outside below a [protruding] side, the uncleanness cleaves upwards and downwards, but the jar remains clean. [If the uncleanness is] within [the jar] and underneath the protruding sides, If there is within the [cavity of] the side a space of a cubic handbreadth everything [within the cavity] becomes unclean, but what lies directly [below] the mouth remains clean. If there is not [a space of a cubic handbreadth] the uncleanness cleaves upwards and downwards. When do these rules apply? When the jar is clean. If it was unclean, or if it was one handbreadth high off the ground, or covered, or inverted [so as to stand] on its mouth, if there is uncleanness beneath it, within it or above it, everything becomes unclean.

If an olive-sized portion of a corpse is stuck to the threshold: Rabbi Eliezer declares the house unclean. Rabbi Joshua declares it clean. If it was placed beneath the threshold, the [case] is judged by the half [in which the uncleanness is found]. If it is stuck to the lintel, the house becomes unclean. Rabbi Yose declares it clean. If it was in the house, a person touching the lintel becomes unclean. [As for] a person touching the threshold: Rabbi Eliezer declares him unclean. Rabbi Joshua says: [if he touches it at a point] below a handbreadth [from the surface] he remains clean; above that handbreadth he becomes unclean.

The following [objects serve to] reduce [the area of a square] handbreadth: [A portion] of less than an olive-size of flesh [of a corpse] reduces [the opening for uncleanness that is] caused by a quarter of a kav of bones [from a corpse]; [A portion] of less than a barley-corn size of bone reduces [the opening for uncleanness that is] caused by an olive-sized portion of flesh; Less than an olive-sized portion of a corpse, Less than an olive-sized portion of carrion, Less than a lentil-sized portion of sheretz; Less than an egg-sized portion of food; Produce growing next to the window, A cobweb having substance; The carcass of a clean bird that he did not intend to eat, And the carcass of an unclean bird that had been intended [for food] that had not been rendered susceptible [to uncleanness], or which had been rendered susceptible [to uncleanness] but had not been intended [for food].

The following [objects serve to] reduce [the area of a square] handbreadth: [A portion] of less than an olive-size of flesh [of a corpse] reduces [the opening for uncleanness that is] caused by a quarter of a kav of bones [from a corpse]; [A portion] of less than a barley-corn size of bone reduces [the opening for uncleanness that is] caused by an olive-sized portion of flesh; Less than an olive-sized portion of a corpse, Less than an olive-sized portion of carrion, Less than a lentil-sized portion of sheretz; Less than an egg-sized portion of food; Produce growing next to the window, A cobweb having substance; The carcass of a clean bird that he did not intend to eat, And the carcass of an unclean bird that had been intended [for food] that had not been rendered susceptible [to uncleanness], or which had been rendered susceptible [to uncleanness] but had not been intended [for food].

The following [objects serve to] reduce [the area of a square] handbreadth: [A portion] of less than an olive-size of flesh [of a corpse] reduces [the opening for uncleanness that is] caused by a quarter of a kav of bones [from a corpse]; [A portion] of less than a barley-corn size of bone reduces [the opening for uncleanness that is] caused by an olive-sized portion of flesh; Less than an olive-sized portion of a corpse, Less than an olive-sized portion of carrion, Less than a lentil-sized portion of sheretz; Less than an egg-sized portion of food; Produce growing next to the window, A cobweb having substance; The carcass of a clean bird that he did not intend to eat, And the carcass of an unclean bird that had been intended [for food] that had not been rendered susceptible [to uncleanness], or which had been rendered susceptible [to uncleanness] but had not been intended [for food].

The following [objects serve to] reduce [the area of a square] handbreadth: [A portion] of less than an olive-size of flesh [of a corpse] reduces [the opening for uncleanness that is] caused by a quarter of a kav of bones [from a corpse]; [A portion] of less than a barley-corn size of bone reduces [the opening for uncleanness that is] caused by an olive-sized portion of flesh; Less than an olive-sized portion of a corpse, Less than an olive-sized portion of carrion, Less than a lentil-sized portion of sheretz; Less than an egg-sized portion of food; Produce growing next to the window, A cobweb having substance; The carcass of a clean bird that he did not intend to eat, And the carcass of an unclean bird that had been intended [for food] that had not been rendered susceptible [to uncleanness], or which had been rendered susceptible [to uncleanness] but had not been intended [for food].

The following [objects serve to] reduce [the area of a square] handbreadth: [A portion] of less than an olive-size of flesh [of a corpse] reduces [the opening for uncleanness that is] caused by a quarter of a kav of bones [from a corpse]; [A portion] of less than a barley-corn size of bone reduces [the opening for uncleanness that is] caused by an olive-sized portion of flesh; Less than an olive-sized portion of a corpse, Less than an olive-sized portion of carrion, Less than a lentil-sized portion of sheretz; Less than an egg-sized portion of food; Produce growing next to the window, A cobweb having substance; The carcass of a clean bird that he did not intend to eat, And the carcass of an unclean bird that had been intended [for food] that had not been rendered susceptible [to uncleanness], or which had been rendered susceptible [to uncleanness] but had not been intended [for food].

The following do not reduce [the area of the window]: Bone does not reduce [the area] for [other] bones; Nor [corpse] flesh for [other] flesh; Nor an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse; Nor an olive-sized portion of carrion; Nor a lentil-sized portion of reptile; Nor an egg-sized portion of food; Nor produce growing in the windows; Nor a cobweb having no substance; Nor the carcass of a clean bird which had been intended [for food]; Nor the carcass of an unclean bird which had been intended [for food] and had been rendered susceptible to uncleanness; Nor warp and woof threads that have negaim; Nor a brick from a bet haperas, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: the brick can reduce, because the dust [of the bet haperas] is clean. This is the general rule: what is clean reduces [the area], and what is unclean does not reduce it.

The following do not reduce [the area of the window]: Bone does not reduce [the area] for [other] bones; Nor [corpse] flesh for [other] flesh; Nor an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse; Nor an olive-sized portion of carrion; Nor a lentil-sized portion of reptile; Nor an egg-sized portion of food; Nor produce growing in the windows; Nor a cobweb having no substance; Nor the carcass of a clean bird which had been intended [for food]; Nor the carcass of an unclean bird which had been intended [for food] and had been rendered susceptible to uncleanness; Nor warp and woof threads that have negaim; Nor a brick from a bet haperas, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: the brick can reduce, because the dust [of the bet haperas] is clean. This is the general rule: what is clean reduces [the area], and what is unclean does not reduce it.

The following do not reduce [the area of the window]: Bone does not reduce [the area] for [other] bones; Nor [corpse] flesh for [other] flesh; Nor an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse; Nor an olive-sized portion of carrion; Nor a lentil-sized portion of reptile; Nor an egg-sized portion of food; Nor produce growing in the windows; Nor a cobweb having no substance; Nor the carcass of a clean bird which had been intended [for food]; Nor the carcass of an unclean bird which had been intended [for food] and had been rendered susceptible to uncleanness; Nor warp and woof threads that have negaim; Nor a brick from a bet haperas, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: the brick can reduce, because the dust [of the bet haperas] is clean. This is the general rule: what is clean reduces [the area], and what is unclean does not reduce it.

The following do not reduce [the area of the window]: Bone does not reduce [the area] for [other] bones; Nor [corpse] flesh for [other] flesh; Nor an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse; Nor an olive-sized portion of carrion; Nor a lentil-sized portion of reptile; Nor an egg-sized portion of food; Nor produce growing in the windows; Nor a cobweb having no substance; Nor the carcass of a clean bird which had been intended [for food]; Nor the carcass of an unclean bird which had been intended [for food] and had been rendered susceptible to uncleanness; Nor warp and woof threads that have negaim; Nor a brick from a bet haperas, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: the brick can reduce, because the dust [of the bet haperas] is clean. This is the general rule: what is clean reduces [the area], and what is unclean does not reduce it.

He who chews wheat kernels says on them “Creator of kinds of seeds.” If he baked or cooked them, as long as pieces are recognizable he recites on them “He Who produces bread from the earth” and afterwards three benedictions. If the pieces are not recognizable, he recites “Creator of kinds of food” and afterwards one benediction in the kind of three. Down to which size are there pieces? Rebbi Yose bar Rebbi Abun, Cahana bar Malkiah in the name of Rav: down to olive-sized bits.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Pedaiah, Rebbi Jonah in the name of Ḥizqiah, there is no mixing except for wine and oil. Rebbi Joḥanan says, they can be mixed up to the size of olives. Our Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “But he mixes together dates and dried figs and then gives.” He explains it up to olive-sized bits.

But that means, he who cannot process in purity, because he is unable. Therefore, if he is able this does not apply. This means that it is forbidden for a person to make his dough qab sized.

Rebbi Bun bar Ḥiyya said before Rebbi Zeˋira: This implies that one is permitted to feed it to ownerless animals. Rebbi Jeremiah objected, did we not state “he crumbles it”? Rebbi Jeremiah was of the opinion, loaf sized. Rebbi Yose said to him, it only mentioned “he crumbles it”, that when he crumbled it it was nullified. But the following says it, leavend matter may not be eaten today, even by the dogs. This includes to forbid it for usufruct. Where do we hold? If for his own dog, the prohibition of usufruct had been stated. But we must hold for the dog [of others]. This implies that one is prohibited from feeding it to ownerless animals.

Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: The olive-sized piece of mazzah with which a person fulfills his obligation on Passover must be without fluid. Rebbi Jeremiah said, this was said for a meritorious deed. Rebbi Abba said, this was said for a meritorious deed. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi said, this was said as a necessary condition. The word of Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya implies that this was said as a necessary condition. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya objected, did we not state: “flat cakes for a thanksgiving offering”? Are there flat cakes for a thanksgiving offering without fluids? Rebbi Yose said, there it is a quartarius; one quartarius splits into many kinds. But what implies this? “One might think and a person could satisfy his obligation with pancake, the verse says, guard the mazzot, a mazzah which needs guarding, excluding this one which does not need guarding.” Because it does not need guarding; therefore if it would need guarding one would satisfy his obligation with it. And so we stated: “One fulfills his obligation with spiced mazzah, even if it does not taste of grain, on condition that it be mostly grain”. They thought to say, spiced by fluids. We may say, spiced by sesame, spiced by nuts. But the following says it: One might think that a person only could satisfy his obligation on Passover with (roasted) [whole grain] bread? From where even with Solomon’s mazzah? The verse says, you shall eat mazzot, it included. If it is so, why does it say bread of affliction? To exclude sursīn, and pancake, and cake.

HALAKHAH: This does not follow Rebbi Nathan, for Rebbi Nathan says, one fulfills one’s obligation by pouring without eating. What is the reason? All of Israel shall slaughter it between the evenings. “It”, even if there is only one Pesaḥ, all fulfill their obligation with one pouring. Ii is impossible that there be an olive-sized bit for everyone.

Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Jehudah: They did not sanctify under the wing in Jerusalem. Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rav Samuel bar Rav Isaac: That the sufferers from skin disease might find shelter in summer from the sun and in the rainy season from rain. Did they similarly not sanctify under the wing of the Temple Mount, that sufferers from gonorrhea and flux might find shelter in summer from the sun and in the rainy season from rain? The sufferer from skin disease has no place to find shelter; the sufferer from gonorrhea finds shelter in all of Jerusalem. Rebbi Joḥanan bar Marius in the name of Rebbi Phineas: Since we see that the rabbis take off their sandals under the wing of the Temple Mount, this implies that they did not sanctify under the wing of the Temple Mount. Rav asked the Elder Rebbi Ḥiyya: What is the status of roofs in Jerusalem? He told him, since one uses as proverb: the Pesaḥ in an olive-sized bit and Hallel breaks the roof, this implies that the roofs of Jerusalem are sanctified. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Miasha, Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac in the name of Rav: The roofs of Jerusalem are profane. But did we not state, “From the wing and inside it is like inside; from the wing and outside it is like outside”? Explain it that the Mishnah speaks about a roof surrounded by buildings forming a courtyard. But did we not state, “windows and the thickness of the wall are like inside”? Explain it again that the Mishnah speaks about a roof surrounded by buildings forming a courtyard. This parallels what Rebbi Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Ḥinena: glacis and wall mourned, the wall and the ante-wall. If they sanctified the thickness of the wall, not so much more the window? Rebbi Aḥa said, it is necessary for the window on top of the wing. Even though you are saying that they did not sanctify under the wing of Jerusalem, they sanctified the window over the wing.

Rebbi Levi said, because usually slaves eat while standing, and here one is forced to eat lying on couches, to proclaim that they went from slavery to freedom. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: This olive-sized bit with which a person fulfills his obligation on Passover he must eat lying down. Rebbi Yose asked before Rebbi Simon, even a slave before his master, even a woman before her husband? He said to him, great personality, that is all I heard.

“All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime he did not fall down half the mountain before he dissolved into limbs; after Simeon the Just’s death he fled to the desert and was eaten by the Saracens. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime the lot for Hashem came up in his right hand; after Simeon the Just’s death sometimes it came up to the right, sometimes to the left. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime the Easternmost light was burning; after Simeon the Just’s death sometimes it was extinguished, sometimes burning. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime the shiny strip turned white; after Simeon the Just’s death sometimes it turned white, sometimes it turned red. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime the fire on the altar steadily increased; after they had put on two logs in the morning they did not add anything during the day. After Simeon the Just’s death the fire weakened; the had to add wood all day long. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime a blessing was in the Two Breads and the shew-bread; the part of each one came to an olive sized bite; some of them ate and were full, some of them ate and left over. After Simeon the Just’s death the blessing was taken from the Two Breads and the shew-bread; the part of each one came only to a pea-sized bit. The decent ones refrained from taking; the gluttons stretched out their hands. It happened that a Cohen from Sepphoris took his and another’s part; he was called “pea-sized one” to this day. This is what David said, My God, let me escape from the hand of the evildoer, from the palm of the criminal and oppressor.”

“All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime he did not fall down half the mountain before he dissolved into limbs; after Simeon the Just’s death he fled to the desert and was eaten by the Saracens. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime the lot for Hashem came up in his right hand; after Simeon the Just’s death sometimes it came up to the right, sometimes to the left. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime the Easternmost light was burning; after Simeon the Just’s death sometimes it was extinguished, sometimes burning. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime the shiny strip turned white; after Simeon the Just’s death sometimes it turned white, sometimes it turned red. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime the fire on the altar steadily increased; after they had put on two logs in the morning they did not add anything during the day. After Simeon the Just’s death the fire weakened; the had to add wood all day long. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime a blessing was in the Two Breads and the shew-bread; the part of each one came to an olive sized bite; some of them ate and were full, some of them ate and left over. After Simeon the Just’s death the blessing was taken from the Two Breads and the shew-bread; the part of each one came only to a pea-sized bit. The decent ones refrained from taking; the gluttons stretched out their hands. It happened that a Cohen from Sepphoris took his and another’s part; he was called “pea-sized one” to this day. This is what David said, My God, let me escape from the hand of the evildoer, from the palm of the criminal and oppressor.”

“All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime he did not fall down half the mountain before he dissolved into limbs; after Simeon the Just’s death he fled to the desert and was eaten by the Saracens. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime the lot for Hashem came up in his right hand; after Simeon the Just’s death sometimes it came up to the right, sometimes to the left. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime the Easternmost light was burning; after Simeon the Just’s death sometimes it was extinguished, sometimes burning. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime the shiny strip turned white; after Simeon the Just’s death sometimes it turned white, sometimes it turned red. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime the fire on the altar steadily increased; after they had put on two logs in the morning they did not add anything during the day. After Simeon the Just’s death the fire weakened; the had to add wood all day long. All during Simeon the Just’s lifetime a blessing was in the Two Breads and the shew-bread; the part of each one came to an olive sized bite; some of them ate and were full, some of them ate and left over. After Simeon the Just’s death the blessing was taken from the Two Breads and the shew-bread; the part of each one came only to a pea-sized bit. The decent ones refrained from taking; the gluttons stretched out their hands. It happened that a Cohen from Sepphoris took his and another’s part; he was called “pea-sized one” to this day. This is what David said, My God, let me escape from the hand of the evildoer, from the palm of the criminal and oppressor.”

And he who burns. Not the one who starts the fire, and not the one who prepares the stake. Who is he who burns? That is the one who helps during the burning. [Rebbi Yose said, this implies that the one who helps during the burning] makes his garments impure. Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: One who turns over an olive-sized piece makes his garments impure. The problem is only one who stands inside and in his hand is a beam with which he turns over an olive-sized piece, [what is the rule]? Let us hear from the following: And he shall take out, and he shall burn. Since one who takes out, only after he took to the outside, also he who burns only if he burns outside. There Ḥizqiah said, he shall be impure until the evening; to include him who burns. Here it is the same.

And he who burns. Not the one who starts the fire, and not the one who prepares the stake. Who is he who burns? That is the one who helps during the burning. [Rebbi Yose said, this implies that the one who helps during the burning] makes his garments impure. Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: One who turns over an olive-sized piece makes his garments impure. The problem is only one who stands inside and in his hand is a beam with which he turns over an olive-sized piece, [what is the rule]? Let us hear from the following: And he shall take out, and he shall burn. Since one who takes out, only after he took to the outside, also he who burns only if he burns outside. There Ḥizqiah said, he shall be impure until the evening; to include him who burns. Here it is the same.

HALAKHAH: “Rebbi Ḥananiah ben Antigonos said, do dry foods exist for sancta? He impales the flat piece on the spit and eats with it an olive-sized bit of meat of heave but not of sancta.”

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yose said, in any case where the true fact can be ascertained, one does not have to bring a reparation offering because of doubt. How is that? If there were before him two olive-sized pieces, one of suet and one of fat, he ate one of them and the other is locked up.He says, since I could determine the true fact if I would find the key, does one have to bring a reparation offering in this case of doubt? Let us hear from the following: “If somebody marries his sister-in-law but she turned out to have been pregnant”, as long as it is not known whether the child lives or does not live, does he have to bring a reparation offering because of the doubt? This means that he does not bring.

Rav said, in any case where the true fact can never be established, one does not have to bring a reparation offering for the doubt. How is that? If there were before him two olive-sized pieces, one of suet and one of fat, he ate one of them, and then a raven ate the other. Since he cannot ascertain the true fact, one does not have to bring a reparation offering for this doubt. But if the raven ate first and then he ate, since he could have ascertained the true fact, one has to bring a reparation offering for the doubt. But did not Rav say, only if he made sure that it certainly was suet? Even though Rav said, only if he made sure that it certainly was suet, he agrees here that he could have ascertained the true fact. A baraita disagrees with Rav: “As Rebbi Eleazar says, one must bring a reparation offering for the doubt of suet.” What does Rav do with that? They disagree with the words of Rebbi Eleazar. A baraita disagrees with Rav: “If there were both a piece of profane [meat] and a piece of sacrificial [meat], he ate one of them and it is not known which one, he brings a reparation offering for the doubt. If he [then] ate the second piece, he brings a reparation offering for a certain transgression. If he ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second, each one brings a reparation offering for the doubt.” One understands that the first brings a reparation offering for the doubt. Why the second? Rebbi Yose said, explain it that the piece was large, he ate half of it and left the other half. A Mishnah disagrees with Rav: “If it is doubtful whether [the child is] a nine-month child of the first [brother] or a seven-month of the second, he has to divorce her, the child is legitimate, and they are obligated for a reparation offering for the doubt.” Here it is impossible to ascertain the true fact and they are obligated for a reparation offering for the doubt! Rebbi Yose said, Rebbi Ze‘ira explained it before Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba; Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: Rebbi Ze‘ira explained it before us. Since he could just have touched her and then separated, he could have known whether it is his or the other’s, it is as if he could have ascertained the true fact!

Rebbi [Yose] said to the colleagues: You should know that Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree: If somebody split a limb from a living animal and ate it, everybody agrees that he is free from prosecution. Where do they disagree? If he split it in his mouth before he ate it. Rebbi Joḥanan considers his mouth as inside, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish considers his mouth as outside. They asked him, what do you say? He answered them, I informed you that mighty mountains disagree, and you ask this? If it is so, even if he split it outside and then ate, he should be guilty! Why? That is how one eats. If somebody split an ant in his mouth and ate it, that is the disagreement of Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Maisha asked Rebbi Ze‘ira: If he split a grape in his mouth and ate it, is that the disagreement of Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? He answered, there it is something for which there is a prohibition and impurity. In a circumstance in which its impurity disappeard, its prohibition disappeared. But here is a prohibition and no impurity. Rebbi Abba ben Rebbi Mamal asked: If he split an olive-sized bit of mazzah in his mouth and ate it, is that the disagreement of Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, in the other cases, his palate did not enjoy an olive sized bit. The rabbis of Caesarea said that Rebbi Nisa asked: If he split in his mouth pomegranate berries which are ‘orlah and ate them, is that the disagreement of Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? Where do we hold? If because of fluids, we already did state: “Nothing makes impure as a drink except what comes from olives and grapes.” The rabbis of Caesarea said, explain it if he swallowed them.

Rebbi [Yose] said to the colleagues: You should know that Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree: If somebody split a limb from a living animal and ate it, everybody agrees that he is free from prosecution. Where do they disagree? If he split it in his mouth before he ate it. Rebbi Joḥanan considers his mouth as inside, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish considers his mouth as outside. They asked him, what do you say? He answered them, I informed you that mighty mountains disagree, and you ask this? If it is so, even if he split it outside and then ate, he should be guilty! Why? That is how one eats. If somebody split an ant in his mouth and ate it, that is the disagreement of Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Maisha asked Rebbi Ze‘ira: If he split a grape in his mouth and ate it, is that the disagreement of Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? He answered, there it is something for which there is a prohibition and impurity. In a circumstance in which its impurity disappeard, its prohibition disappeared. But here is a prohibition and no impurity. Rebbi Abba ben Rebbi Mamal asked: If he split an olive-sized bit of mazzah in his mouth and ate it, is that the disagreement of Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, in the other cases, his palate did not enjoy an olive sized bit. The rabbis of Caesarea said that Rebbi Nisa asked: If he split in his mouth pomegranate berries which are ‘orlah and ate them, is that the disagreement of Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? Where do we hold? If because of fluids, we already did state: “Nothing makes impure as a drink except what comes from olives and grapes.” The rabbis of Caesarea said, explain it if he swallowed them.

“Rebbi Aqiba says, even if he dipped his bread in wine for a total volume of an olive, he is guilty.” Rebbi Ḥanania said, only if he dipped in an olive-sized volume of wine. Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: For a mixed cup one whips because of soaking. That is, if they did (not) warn because of soaking. But if they warned because of soaking, this does not apply. It is written: “He shall not drink anything soaked in grapes.” Not only soaking grapes, from where soaking grape skins? The verse says “soaked, anything soaked,” that all kinds of soaking are counted. Mixed wine combines with pure wine. Soaking water of grapes combines with grapes. Do soaked grapes and wine combine? If one ate half an olive’s volume of wine and half an olive’s volume of soaking water, is he not guilty. Separately, he is not prosecutable. Because he combined, he is guilty. If he ate (sic!) an olive’s volume of wine and an olive’s volume of soaking water, he is guilty only once. Separately, he is guilty twice. Because he combined, he should be guilty only once.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Eleazar said in the name of Rebbi Joshua: For any impurity caused by a corpse for which the nazir shaves, one is guilty if entering the Sanctuary, but for any impurity caused by a corpse for which the nazir does not shave, one is not guilty if entering the Sanctuary. Rebbi Meïr said, this should not be less than the impurity of a dead reptile! Rebbi Aqiba said, I argued before Rebbi Eliezer: If for a barley-grain sized bone, which does not cause impurity to a human in a tent, a nazir shaves if he touches or carries it, should it not be logical that for a quartarius of blood, which causes impurity to a human in a tent, a nazir should have to shave if he touches or carries it? He said to me, what is that, Aqiba? This is not a place for an argument de minore ad majus! When I came and expounded that before Rebbi Joshua, he said to me, you have a good argument, but that is what they said was practice.

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said that Bar Piqa asked Rebbi: So far in a cave that had a ceiling. Even in a cave without ceiling? Does Bar Piqa think that if there is a doubt regarding floating impurity, it is pure? Rebbi told him, Bar Piqa remains in his stupidity: No case of doubt regarding floating impurity is declared pure except a reptile; but a corpse is like something fixed in place. As it was stated: “Anything thrown is pure in case of a doubt except an olive-sized piece from a corpse, [and] also those covers which induce impurity on bottom and top.”

HALAKHAH: “They said to him, did not the teacher use to say,” etc. Rebbi Yose the Southerner said before Rebbi Jonah: Would it not have been necessary to state, if it is so then those of the Days of the New Moon could be brought on the Day of Atonement since one increases holiness but one does not diminish; but those of the Day of Atonement cannot be brought on the Days of the New Moon since one does not diminish holiness. Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Bun explained it by another explanation: if it is so then those of the Day of Atonement could be brought on the Days of the New Moon, for included in their atoning is the atoning of the Days of the New Moon, but those of the days of the New Moon cannot be brought on the Day of Atonement, for they atone only their atonement. For if anybody ate five olive-sized pieces of fat and dedicated four sacrifices, being of the impression that he had dedicated five, did he atone? Or if he ate four olive sized pieces of fat, dedicated five sacrifices, being of the impression that he had dedicated four, not so much more? And so “Rebbi Simeon used to say, thirty-two rams are brought for the public every year. Thirty one outside, they are eaten. One inside which is not eaten. And the scapegoat. Twelve for the twelve months of the year. Eight on Tabernacles, seven on Passover, two on Pentecost, one for the day and one for the bread. One on New Year’s Day and one on the Day of Atonement.” When Moses heard this he said, it follows that anybody for whom the doubt of a transgression arises should bring all these sacrifices! Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: When the Holy One, praise to Him, said to Moses, he shall confess on it etc., he started and said, A Song of confession, inspired by he shall confess on it.

HALAKHAH: “They said to him, did not the teacher use to say,” etc. Rebbi Yose the Southerner said before Rebbi Jonah: Would it not have been necessary to state, if it is so then those of the Days of the New Moon could be brought on the Day of Atonement since one increases holiness but one does not diminish; but those of the Day of Atonement cannot be brought on the Days of the New Moon since one does not diminish holiness. Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Bun explained it by another explanation: if it is so then those of the Day of Atonement could be brought on the Days of the New Moon, for included in their atoning is the atoning of the Days of the New Moon, but those of the days of the New Moon cannot be brought on the Day of Atonement, for they atone only their atonement. For if anybody ate five olive-sized pieces of fat and dedicated four sacrifices, being of the impression that he had dedicated five, did he atone? Or if he ate four olive sized pieces of fat, dedicated five sacrifices, being of the impression that he had dedicated four, not so much more? And so “Rebbi Simeon used to say, thirty-two rams are brought for the public every year. Thirty one outside, they are eaten. One inside which is not eaten. And the scapegoat. Twelve for the twelve months of the year. Eight on Tabernacles, seven on Passover, two on Pentecost, one for the day and one for the bread. One on New Year’s Day and one on the Day of Atonement.” When Moses heard this he said, it follows that anybody for whom the doubt of a transgression arises should bring all these sacrifices! Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: When the Holy One, praise to Him, said to Moses, he shall confess on it etc., he started and said, A Song of confession, inspired by he shall confess on it.

Rebbi Abba bar Mamal asked: According to Rebbi Joḥanan, who said that comprehensive oaths fall on prohibitions, should we not state “an oath that I shall not eat; when he ate”? Rebbi Ze`ira said, in the whole lifetime of Rebbi Abba bar Mamal we did not find an answer; after he had died, we found an answer. Where do we stand? If one said, an oath that I shall not eat meat, including Passover; that I shall not eat during these ten days, including the Day of Atonement, then the oath falls on prohibitions. Rebbi Yose said, one may infer from here if in front of him were olive-sized pieces of slaughtered [meat] and one of carcass meat and he said, [an oath] that I shall eat these ten olive-sized pieces, since he is not liable for the carcass meat, he neither is liable for the remainder.

Rebbi Abba bar Mamal asked: According to Rebbi Joḥanan, who said that comprehensive oaths fall on prohibitions, should we not state “an oath that I shall not eat; when he ate”? Rebbi Ze`ira said, in the whole lifetime of Rebbi Abba bar Mamal we did not find an answer; after he had died, we found an answer. Where do we stand? If one said, an oath that I shall not eat meat, including Passover; that I shall not eat during these ten days, including the Day of Atonement, then the oath falls on prohibitions. Rebbi Yose said, one may infer from here if in front of him were olive-sized pieces of slaughtered [meat] and one of carcass meat and he said, [an oath] that I shall eat these ten olive-sized pieces, since he is not liable for the carcass meat, he neither is liable for the remainder.

If one ate half the volume of an olive before he was appointed, half the volume of an olive after he was appointed, half the volume of an olive after he was removed from office. Since [no] obligation of a sacrifice came in between, do they combine? Let us hear from the following: Before him were three [olive sized pieces]. He ate the first but did not realize it; the second (and the third) while he was oblivious of the first. He was informed of the first but was not informed of the second. [He ate] the third while oblivious of the second. Afterwards he was informed about all of them. Rebbi Joḥanan said, he is liable for the first and the second but not liable for the third. Rebbi Yose said, the second depends on his intention. If he wishes, he atones for it with the first; if he wishes, he atones for it with the third. The colleagues compare it to four half-olives. If he was intelligent, he brings one sacrifice; otherwise, he brings two sacrifices. How is that? He brings one for the first and the second together; one for the third and fourth together. (Rebbi Yose compares it to full olive sizes. If he was intelligent, he brings two sacrifices; otherwise, he brings three sacrifices. How is that? He brings one for the first and the second together, and one for the third and fourth together.) If he brought for the middle ones, he is not liable for the first and the fourth. Rebbi Yose compares it to full olive sizes. If he was intelligent, he brings two sacrifices; otherwise, he brings three sacrifices. How is that? He brings one for the first and the second together, and one for the third and fourth together. If he brought for the middle ones, he is liable for the first separately and for the fourth separately.

If he ate a full olive sized piece but there is doubt whether he ate it on the Day of Atonement or before the Day of Atonement. The atonement atones for the doubt. Whether he ate it on the Day of Atonement or after the Day of Atonement. The colleagues say, atonement atones for the doubt. Rebbi Mattaniah said, the atonement atones only for doubt of the kinds of blood. A Mishnah supports the colleagues: “Sabbath and the Day of Atonement and he worked in twilight.” As you take it, if it was the Day of Atonement, it atoned. If it was weekday, it is permitted. But did we not state “he ate”? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, eating permitted [food].

Across the Jordan—three [cities]; in the land of Israel—three?! [How can such diverse sized populations need the same number of cities?] Abaye said: In Gilead [more generally a term for the other side of the Jordan], there were a lot of murderers.

But Kedesh is a city of refuge?! But it is written, "The fortified towns: Tzidim, Tzar and Hamat, Rakat and Khineret... and Kedesh, and Edrai and Ein Hatzor? (Joshua 19:35-37)" [which means that Kedesh is a fortified town]. And it is taught [in a baraita]: "Those cities [of refuge]—make them neither small villages nor large cities but medium-sized towns"?! [Which means that Kedesh cannot be a fortified town and still qualify as a city of refuge]. Rav Yoseif said: "There were two Kedesh's." Rav Ashi said: "Like Seleucia and the acropolis of Seleucia." [Kedesh had a separate, administrative section known as Kedesh as well as a distinct town called Kedesh, like the case we know of in Seleucia].

The main [text]: "Those cities [of refuge]—make them neither small villages nor large cities but medium-sized towns. And don't set them up except in a place of water; if there is no water, then bring to them water. And don't set them up except in a place of market streets. And don't set them up except in a place [where there are] guard legions; if the legions get reduced, add to them. If the residencies get reduced, bring to them priests, Levites and Israelites.