💾 Archived View for scholasticdiversity.us.to › scriptures › jewish › t › Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Nazar… captured on 2024-08-31 at 16:35:57. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2024-05-10)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
7 [1] There are types of impurity resulting from [contact with] a corpse that do not require a nazirite to perform a shaving and do not invalidate the days previously observed even though he became impure in a manner that requires him to observe impurity for [at least] seven days. [The rationale is that] it is not stated concerning such situations: "When one will become impure due [to contact with] a corpse...", but rather [Numbers 6:9], "When a person will die upon him." [This implies that] he must become impure with those impurities that involve the actual substance of the corpse. Afterwards, he must bring the sacrifices [required] and perform the shaving required [when emerging from] impurity. All of the days [he observed] initially are invalidated. [2] These are the types of impurity stemming from contact with a corpse that a nazirite must shave because of [contact with] them: a) a stillborn fetus, even if the sinews connecting its limbs have not formed, b) an olive-sized portion of the flesh of a corpse, c) an olive-sized portion of a decomposed corpse, d) bones from a corpse which represent the majority of the number of the bones of a corpse even though their volume is not a fourth of a *kav,* e) bones which represent the majority of the structure of the bones of a corpse even though their volume is not a fourth of a *kav*, f) a half of a *kav* of bones even though they do not represent the majority of the number or the structure of the bones of the corpse - all the bones must, however, be from one corpse, not from two, g) the backbone that comes from one corpse, h) the skull that comes from one corpse, i) a [complete] limb that comes from one corpse, j) a limb taken from a living person that has flesh that could cause it to regenerate in a living person, k) half a *log* of blood from one corpse, and l) a handful of the decomposed mass of a corpse.
What is meant by the term *netzel*? Flesh from a corpse that decomposed and became putrid liquid. [3] The decomposed mass (*rekev*) of a corpse does not convey ritual impurity unless it was buried naked in a marble coffin and was entirely intact. If one limb was lacking or it was buried in garments or in a wooden or metal coffin, there is no concept of *rekev*. The concept of *rekev* applies with regard to a corpse alone. This excludes a person who was slain, for his blood is lacking. [4] When two corpses are buried together, the hair and the nails of a corpse were cut off and buried together with it, or a woman was buried together with a fetus in her womb, the *rekev* does not convey ritual impurity.
Similarly, if one ground up a corpse until it became a decomposed mass, [these laws do not apply]. It must decompose naturally. If one ground the corpse and then left its remains until they decomposed naturally or a portion of the body decomposed while the person was alive, he died, and then the entire body decomposed, there is an unresolved doubt [concerning the ruling]. Hence, if [a nazirite] becomes impure because of this *rekev*, there is an unresolved doubt whether he is impure. Similarly, there is an unresolved doubt whether [a nazirite] is impure if he contacts impurity from a fourth of a *kav* of bones coming from the backbone or the skull when he is under the same shelter as they are. [5] [With regard to] all of these twelve [sources] of impurity that we listed: If a nazirite touches one of these sources, carries it, covers it from above with [a portion of his body], [the source of] impurity covers [a portion of] the nazirite's [body], or the nazirite and [the source of] impurity were located under the same shelter, [the nazirite becomes impure]. He must perform the shaving [required because of] impurity and bring the sacrifices [required because of] impurity. All [of the days he observed] are invalidated. The only exception is a *rekev*. It does not convey impurity when one touches it, for it is impossible to touch it entirely [at the same time], for it is not a single mass. If, however, one carried it or became impure because one was under the same shelter, he must perform the shaving. [6] Similarly, if a nazirite touches or carries a bone from a corpse - even if it is merely the size of a barley-corn - he must perform a shaving because of it and bring the sacrifices [required because of] impurity. All [of the days he observed] are invalidated. A bone the size of a barley corn does not, however, convey impurity if one was under the same shelter.
If, by contrast, [a nazirite] becomes impure because of contact with one of the following twelve matters, [the days he observed] are not invalidated:
a) a clod of earth from the Diaspora;
b) [earth from] a field in which a grave had been plowed; both of these convey impurity through touch or if they were carried;
c) branches which emerge from trees, protrusions that emerge from fences, from a bed, a camel, or the like, cover him and one of the twelve sources of impurity [mentioned in the Halachah 2];
d) he becomes impure by being under the same shelter as a quarter of a *kav* of bones that do not constitute the majority of the number of the corpse's bones, nor the greater portion of his structure;
e) he became impure because of a *revi'it* of blood from a corpse which conveys ritual impurity whether one touches it, carries it, or is found under the same shelter; f) he became impure because he touched or was under the same shelter as a gravestone or a stone at the side of a grave; for they convey impurity in either of these two ways; g) he became impure because of contact with a limb cut from a living person or a corpse which does not have sufficient flesh upon it. [7] Even though in all the above situations, [the nazirite] is impure for seven days and he must have [the ashes of the Red Heifer] sprinkled [upon him] on the third and seventh days, he should not perform the shaving [required when emerging from] impurity, nor bring the sacrifices [required at that time], nor are his initial days invalidated. Nevertheless, the days when he is impure are not counted as part of his nazirite vow. [8] When [a nazirite] touches a shelter in which a corpse is found or utensils that are touching a corpse, he should not have [the ashes of the Red Heifer] sprinkled [upon him] on the third and seventh days. It appears to me that this law is unique to a nazirite. Any other person who contracts impurity that persists for seven days from utensils must have [the ashes of the Red Heifer] sprinkled [upon him] on the third and seventh days, as will be explained in *Hilchot Tuma'at Meit*. Similarly, it appears to me that the reason [a nazirite] does not have [the ashes of the Red Heifer] sprinkled [upon him] on the third and seventh days if he touched utensils [that convey such ritual impurity] is so that the days on which he is impure because [of contact with] the utensil will be counted as part of the days of his nazirite vow. [9] When a nazirite contracts *tzara'at* and has his status [as a *metzora*] defined, all of the days during which he is set apart [as a *metzora*] and the seven days that he counts after purifying himself from his *tzara'at* between the first shaving and the second shaving do not count as days of his nazirite vow. The days when he is quarantined, by contrast, are counted [as part of his nazirite vow]. Similarly, if either a male or a female has a *zav* emission from their flesh, all of the days of the emission are counted as part of their [nazirite vow] although they are impure. This matter is a halachah transmitted to Moses at Sinai. [10] Needless to say, if [a nazirite] becomes impure as a result of other sources of impurity that the days during which he is impure are counted [as part of his nazirite vow] and no days are invalidated. If he becomes impure due to contact with a corpse during the time he is afflicted with *tzara'at*, all of the previous days are invalidated. [The rationale is that] he is still a nazirite, even though he is ritually impure. [11] A nazirite is permitted to become impure due to contact with a corpse when doing so is a mitzvah and may shave when doing so is a mitzvah. He is, however, forbidden to partake of [all] wine, whether in connection with a mitzvah or with regard to matters left to one's own choice.
What is implied? A person took an oath that he will drink wine on this day. Thus it is a mitzvah for him to drink. Afterwards, he took a nazirite vow. The nazirite vow takes effect and [supercedes] the oath he took. Hence he is forbidden to drink wine. Needless to say, [a nazirite] is forbidden [to partake of] the wine [over which] *Kiddush* and *Havdalah* are recited. For [associating these blessings with wine] is merely a Rabbinic ordinance. [12] What is meant by the statement that he is permitted to become impure due to contact with a corpse when it is a mitzvah? If he was walking on the road and encountered a corpse and there was no one else to bury it, he should become impure through contact with it and bury it. These matters were communicated by the Oral Tradition. [13] When a nazirite and a priest encounter a corpse that it is a mitzvah [to bury] the nazirite should [bury it and] become impure even though he invalidates the days [he observed] previously and must bring a sacrifice [because of his] impurity. The priest should not become impure. [The rationale is that the nazirite's] holiness is within the context of time - even if he took an everlasting nazirite vow - while the priest's holiness is beyond the context of time. [14] If two nazirites - one whose nazirite vow was for 30 days and one whose nazirite vow was for 100 days encounter [such a corpse] - the one whose nazirite vow was for 30 days should become impure. If one was a nazirite for a limited amount of time and the other was a nazirite forever, the nazirite for a limited amount of time should become impure. For the nazirite for all time has a higher degree of holiness. [15] What is meant by the statement that he is permitted to shave when doing so is a mitzvah? When a nazirite contracts *tzara'at* and becomes healed in the midst of the days of his nazirite vow, he should shave all of his hair.
[The rationale is that] by shaving, he fulfills a positive commandment, for concerning a *metzora*, [Leviticus 14:8] states: "And he shall shave all of his hair." Whenever there is [a conflict between] a positive commandment and a negative commandment, if it is possible to observe both of them, that is desirable. If not, the positive commandment supercedes the negative commandment.
Nevertheless, when a nazirite shaves his hair during the midst of his nazirite vow, he violates both a negative commandment and a positive commandment, as [Numbers 6:5] states: "[His hair] is holy. He shall let the mane of the hair of his head grow." And [the observance of] a positive commandment does not supercede a negative commandment that [is reinforced by] a positive commandment. Why then does the positive commandment of shaving the blemish supercede his nazirite vow? Because the nazirite has already become impure because of the *tzara'at* and the days when he is defined as impure are not counted [towards the fulfillment of his vow], as we explained. [Hence,] his [hair] is not holy during these days. Thus the positive commandment [mentioned above] is withdrawn and only the negative commandment [Leviticus, *loc. cit.*]: "A razor shall not pass over his head" alone remains incumbent upon him. Therefore the positive commandment of shaving [because of the *tzara'at*] can come and supercede it.
Version: Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007
Source: https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001020101/NLI
License: CC-BY-NC