פירוש על נגעים 4:11

ונולד בהרת כחצי גריס ובה שתי שערות כו' הרי זו להחלט – wherever it teaches [in the Mishnah]: "ובה שתי שערות"/ “and in it are two hairs” or "ובה שערה אחת" / “and in it is one hair”, it is not that the hairs and ""the bright white spot in the flesh/בהרת that come together, but rather, that the bright white spot in the flesh came first and afterwards came the hairs.

A bright spot the size of a split bean and there was nothing else, and then there appeared a bright spot of the size of half a split bean having two hairs, this one is declared unclean. Originally there was a nega (the bright spot) the size of half a split bean without any white hairs. Then another bright spot appeared next to it, but it too was not large enough itself to be a nega. However, it did have two hairs. When we combine the two bright spots we now have a nega the size of a split bean, which is enough to count as a nega. And because half of the nega came before the white hairs, this is considered a case of the nega preceding the white hairs. Therefore he is declared impure.

ואם שער לבן קדמה לבהרת טהור – as it is written (Leviticus 13:10): "[וראה הכהן והנה שאת-לבנה בעור] והיא הפכה שער לבן [ומחית בשר חי בשאת]."/ “[If the priest finds on the skin a white swelling] which has turned some hair white, [with a patch of un-discolored flesh in the swelling],” it is the bright white spot in the flesh which caused the hair to turn to a white color.

Because they said: if the bright spot preceded the white hair he is unclean; if the white hair preceded the bright spot he is clean; and if it is doubtful he is unclean. This is the general rule the nega must precede the white hairs for him to be unclean. However, if it is doubtful which came first, he is considered unclean.

ספק טמא – there is doubt if the white hair preceded the bright white spot in the flesh/בהרת or that the bright white spot in the flesh preceded the white hair, it is impure.

Rabbi Joshua regards this as unsolvable. Rabbi Joshua wasn't so certain what to do in the above case. He basically deemed it unsolvable because he wasn't sure if this was a case of the nega coming first since only half of it existed before the white hairs. According to most commentators, he also disagreed with the ruling that "if it is doubtful he is unclean" for he reasoned that in cases of doubt we should be lenient. I thought it might be interesting to bring a Talmudic story related to this mishnah. It appears in Bava Metzia 86a: There was a dispute in the heavenly college: if the bright spot comes before the white hairs, he is impure. And if the white hairs come before the bright spot, he is pure. If it is doubtful [what is the law]? And it was decided that Rabbah bar Nahmani should decide the case, for Rabbah bar Nahmani used to say that he was the only one who knew the law of Negaim and the only one who knew the law of Ohalot. They sent a messenger for him and the angel of death could not touch him, for he did not stop studying for one moment. In the meantime a wind blew and made noise with the trees of the forest, and Rabbah thought that a legion of soldiers was after him and he said: It is better for me to die through the angel of death than to be taken by the Government. When he was dying, he said "he is pure, he is pure." Then a heavenly voice came forth, saying: Happy are you, Rabbah bar Nahmani, for your body is pure, and your soul left you body while you were saying "pure." There are many interesting things about this story, but one of the tidbits I really find interesting is that only Rabbah bar Nahmani knew the laws of Ohalot and Negaim well enough to make decisions on these matters. It is difficult material so hard even the rabbis themselves had trouble with it!

ורבי יהושע קהה – we have the reading. From the language of (Jeremiah 31:29): “[In those days, they shall no longer say, ‘Parents have eaten sour grapes] and children’s teeth are blunted.”/"ושני בנים תקהינה". Meaning to say, that his teeth were blunted from stating the words that it is doubtfully impure, for he held that it is doubtfully pure. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehoshua.