Talmud for Nazir 3:5
מִי שֶׁנָּזַר וְהוּא בְּבֵית הַקְּבָרוֹת, אֲפִלּוּ הָיָה שָׁם שְׁלשִׁים יוֹם, אֵין עוֹלִין לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן וְאֵינוֹ מֵבִיא קָרְבַּן טֻמְאָה. יָצָא וְנִכְנַס, עוֹלִין לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן וּמֵבִיא קָרְבַּן טֻמְאָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, לֹא בוֹ בַיּוֹם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר ו) וְהַיָּמִים הָרִאשֹׁנִים יִפְּלוּ, עַד שֶׁיִּהְיוּ לוֹ יָמִים רִאשׁוֹנִים:
If one assumed Naziritism while he was in the cemetery, even if he were there thirty days, they do not accrue to the count (of Naziritism), and he does not bring an offering for uncleanliness. [For that offering is prescribed for a Nazirite who was clean and became unclean. In any event, if he were forewarned, he receives stripes.] If he went out and re-entered, they do accrue to the count, and he brings an offering of uncleanliness. [The gemara explains this Mishnah thus: If he went out of the cemetery, and were besprinkled (with the cleansing waters) the third and seventh days, and immersed, and were purified from his uncleanliness, and began to count the days of his Naziritism — even though he afterwards re-entered the cemetery, these days that he counted after he became clean do accrue to him, since cleanliness intervened between the first days that he assumed Naziritism in the cemetery and these latter days. And even though he re-entered the cemetery, the uncleanliness of the cemetery does not offset the number of days that he counted in cleanliness. For only the twelve varieties of uncleanliness stated in respect to Naziritism offset these days. As to "and he brings an offering of cleanliness," this is what is meant: If he became unclean again, with one of the uncleanlinesses which cause a Nazirite to shave, he brings an offering of uncleanliness and offsets (the count). R. Eliezer says; Not on the same day, it being written (Numbers 6:12): "And the first days shall fall off" — there must be "first days." [That is, if on the day that he immersed and cleansed himself he became unclean with one of the uncleanlinesses which cause the Nazirite to shave, he does not offset that day, it being written: "And the first days shall fall off" — Uncleanliness does not offset until two days of Naziritism have been counted. And the same is true for a Nazirite in general, who became unclean on the first day of his Naziritism — Uncleanliness does not offset that day, but he includes it in the count of the days of his Naziritism. The halachah is in accordance with R. Eliezer.]
Jerusalem Talmud Terumot
The “reservoir of Discus” according to Rashi is named either after a place or a person Discus, Latin proper n.: “It happened that the reservoir of Discus at Jabneh was damaged, measured, and found deficient35Because something happened to the structure, they measured the volume of the water after the accident and found it to be less than 40 seah and, therefore, to be unusable for purification (cf. Chapter 4, Note 112). Since earlier, the miqweh was a valid one, a person who had immersed himself before the accident came to ask whether he could be considered pure because of the prior validity of the miqweh, or whether he was impure since now the miqweh was invalid.. Rebbi Ṭarphon declared pure and Rebbi Aqiba impure. Rebbi Ṭarphon said, the prior status of this miqweh was one of purity; it remains forever in its purity until it becomes known that it is deficient. Rebbi Aqiba said, the prior status of the impure is impurity, he remains forever in his impurity until it becomes known that he is pure. Rebbi Ṭarphon said, to what can this be compared? To one who was standing sacrificing on the altar when it became known that he was the son of a divorcee or of a woman who had performed ḥaliẓah, whose work is valid. Rebbi Aqiba said, to what can this be compared? To one who was standing sacrificing on the altar when it became known that he has a bodily defect, whose work is invalid36Lev. 21:16–24. Since it is stated (v. 17) that a person with a bodily defect “shall not come close to present the bread of his God,” it is clear that this prohibition overrides the general inclusion inferred from Deut. 26:3 or 33:11.. Rebbi Ṭarphon said to him, how is that, Aqiba? I am comparing this to the son of a divorcee or of a woman who had performed ḥaliẓah, and you compare it to one with a bodily defect. Let us see to which case it really is similar; if to the son of a divorcee or of a woman who had performed ḥaliẓah, let us learn from the son of the divorcee, but if to one with a bodily defect, let us learn from the person with a bodily defect. Rebbi Aqiba said to him, the miqweh is invalid because of an inherent defect; the one with a bodily defect is disqualified because of an inherent defect. The son of a divorcee cannot prove anything since he is disqualified because of others37His parents.. The miqweh is invalid because of itself, the one with a bodily defect is disqualified because of himself; the son of a divorcee cannot prove anything since he is disqualified by the court38As noted below, only the court can strip him of his role as Cohen, and only after regular judicial proceedings.. They voted on the matter and declared him impure. Rebbi Ṭarphon said to Rebbi Aqiba, he who separates himself from you is as if he separated himself from his own life.”