Talmud sur Ta'anit 2:1

¹³Here a Genizah fragment (Ginze Schechter pp. 446–447) becomes readable again (ג). Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Mamal: If a person could construct an equal cut by himself, he could make a creeping animal causing impurity in a tent and a corpse causing impurity in the volume of a lentil, by explaining textile, leather; textile, leather¹⁴A dead creeping animal (of the list Lev. 11:29–30) imparts impurity in the volume of a lentil; a human corpse only in the volume of an olive. A human corpse imparts impurity to everything under the same roof with it, a dead creeping one imparts impurity only by contact. The argument is incomprehensible but the text is confirmed not only by ג but also by Sefer Hapardes from the school of Rashi (Pardes Gadol §175, ed. H. L. Ehrenreich p. 230), and Meïri Pesaḥim (ed. Y. Klein, col. 290a). While textile and leather are written about the creeping animal in Lev. 11:32, they are not mentioned in the Chapter about tent impurity (Num. 19). It is mentioned in the Chapter about ṣāraˋ at impurity of textiles (Lev. 13:47–59) although not in the exact wording of 11:32. The argument should be that the equal cut is illegitimate since minimal sizes for impurity of animals are determined by volume while those of textiles by surface area; the rules cannot be transferred.. So if a creeping animal is in a person’s hand, even if he immerses himself in the waters of the Siloam, or in waters of a primeval ocean, he never can achieve purity. If he throws it away, immediately he becomes pure¹⁵This argument does not belong here, it is not in ג, nor in Pardes, nor in Meïri. It is part of a sermon in Taˋanti (Yerushalmi 2:1 69a line 69, Babli 16a.). Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Mamal: A person may use an equal cut to confirm what he has learned; nobody may use an equal cut to invalidate what he has learned¹⁶Since it is part of oral tradition.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Mamal: A person may argue de minore ad majus by himself; a person may not argue an equal cut by himself¹⁶Since it is part of oral tradition.. Therefore one can contradict an argument de minore ad majus; one cannot contradict an equal cut.

“Onias the digger of ditches.” He was digging ditches and caves³⁷To create miqwaot for pilgrims to the Temple. and knew which rock cools the water and which rock was dry and how far its dryness extended. Rebbi Aḥa said, but (he) [his son]³⁸Reading of B and the corrector, to be deleted. died of thirst. ³⁹The text also is in Yom Ṭov3:9 (Note 124, צ). Rebbi Ḥanina said, anybody who says that the All-Merciful is indulgent, his intestines shall dissolve themselves; for He is forbearing and then collects His due. Rebbi Aḥa said, it is written⁴⁰Ps. 50:3., His surroundings are very hairy. He is exact with them like a hair’s width. Rebbi Yose said, not because of this reason, but because what is written⁴¹Ps. 89:8., He is awesome on His surroundings, His fear on those near Him is greater than those far away.

¹²⁰Reference to Mishnah 12, found only in G.[Just as the city grants asylum, so does its domain grants asylum.] ¹²¹Tosephta 3:10, Sifry Deut. 185. The Tosephta credits Abba Shaul with the statement quoted here for R. Nehorai. Sifry quotes R. Nehorai and (Rebbi) Shaul, in inverse order.“Three cities did Moses designate in Transjordan. When they came to the Land they designated another three. In the future there will be another three, as it is said three, three, three¹²²Deut. 19:9. It is written there in v. 7, “three cities you shall designate”. Since it is already reported in Deut. 4:41–43 that Moses designated three cities in Transjordan, v. 19:7 must refer to the three cities which Joshua designated. Therefore 19:9 must refer to another three cities situated in the Northern part of the Land of Promise (Num. 34:1–15) that never was part of the historical Land of Israel. In the opinion of Abba Shaul this Northern part, promised only if the entire people keep all biblical commandments, was as wide as the Cis- and Transjordan parts of the Land of Israel, and therefore needed not three but six additional cities of refuge. It is difficult to make sense of R. Nehorai’s statement.
In the text probably one should read three(Deut. 19:7), three, the three(Deut.19:9). The words עוֹד “additional”, עַל אֵלֶּה “to these” are in Deut. 19:9. In the Constantinople edition, the argument of Abba Shaul for the first 9 is identical to that of the anonymous Tanna; this might be lectio facilior.. This makes nine. Abba Shaul says, three. Three of three times three makes nine. Additional makes twelve. Rebbi Nehorai says, three, three, three make nine. Additional makes twelve. To these three makes fifteen.” It is written¹²³Num. 35:13.: Six cities of refuge there shall be for you, that all six of them give asylum simultaneously. And you say so¹²⁴If this refers to the previous statement,then it is pointed out that Num. 35:13, which limits the number to six, cannot be squared with Deut. 19:9 which suggests nine. The question can be directed only at the anonymous Tanna who requires 9, and R. Nehorai who requires 15 cities, but not at Abba Shaul who envisages two pairs of six cities each.
Another interpretation (Pene Moshe) has this sentence starting a new paragraph, referring to Mishnah 9, and wonders why a High Priest of Second Temple times, who was not anointed with the holy oil compounded by Moses (Ex. 30:22–33) should have the power to free the exiled homicide. It is stated there in v. 23 that only Moses himself could compound this oil and in v. 31 that it should be used for all subsequent generations. By tradition, Josia buried the oil flask together with the Ark of the Covenant in the Temple Mount (2Chr.35:3) after the prophetess Hulda informed him of the imminent destruction of the Temple.? It follows what Rebbi Samuel [ben Aina]¹²⁵Added from G (and the parallels, Taˋaniot 2:1, Horaiot 3:2, as well as the Babli, Yoma 21b). Only R. Samuel bar Aina is known as student of R. Aha. said in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: Five things was the last Temple missing which were in the first Temple, as it is written¹²⁶Hag. 1:8.: Go to the mountain, bring wood, etc., up to I may be honored. It is written I shall be honored, without the letter he¹²⁷Ketib וְאֶכָּבֵד, Qere וְאֶכָּֽבְדָה֭. Both spellings make sense. The missing ה is interpreted in the Alexandrian system of numeration as “5”.. These are the five things which the last Temple was missing which were in the first Temple. They are: The fire¹²⁸The Heavenly fire (2Chr. 7:1)., the Ark¹²⁴If this refers to the previous statement,then it is pointed out that Num. 35:13, which limits the number to six, cannot be squared with Deut. 19:9 which suggests nine. The question can be directed only at the anonymous Tanna who requires 9, and R. Nehorai who requires 15 cities, but not at Abba Shaul who envisages two pairs of six cities each.
Another interpretation (Pene Moshe) has this sentence starting a new paragraph, referring to Mishnah 9, and wonders why a High Priest of Second Temple times, who was not anointed with the holy oil compounded by Moses (Ex. 30:22–33) should have the power to free the exiled homicide. It is stated there in v. 23 that only Moses himself could compound this oil and in v. 31 that it should be used for all subsequent generations. By tradition, Josia buried the oil flask together with the Ark of the Covenant in the Temple Mount (2Chr.35:3) after the prophetess Hulda informed him of the imminent destruction of the Temple., Urim and Tummim¹²⁹Which are mentioned as worn by the High Priest (Ex. 28:30) but for which no description or instructions are given., anointing oil¹²⁴If this refers to the previous statement,then it is pointed out that Num. 35:13, which limits the number to six, cannot be squared with Deut. 19:9 which suggests nine. The question can be directed only at the anonymous Tanna who requires 9, and R. Nehorai who requires 15 cities, but not at Abba Shaul who envisages two pairs of six cities each.
Another interpretation (Pene Moshe) has this sentence starting a new paragraph, referring to Mishnah 9, and wonders why a High Priest of Second Temple times, who was not anointed with the holy oil compounded by Moses (Ex. 30:22–33) should have the power to free the exiled homicide. It is stated there in v. 23 that only Moses himself could compound this oil and in v. 31 that it should be used for all subsequent generations. By tradition, Josia buried the oil flask together with the Ark of the Covenant in the Temple Mount (2Chr.35:3) after the prophetess Hulda informed him of the imminent destruction of the Temple., and the Holy Spirit¹³⁰The spirit of prophecy..