Nazir 54a (נד.) — the Talmud in English

For the Master said: Impurity breaks through and rises—

impurity

breaks through and descends.

But with regard to touching [

contact impurity],

it is taught

to interpret the verse: “

And he shall take hyssop and sprinkle it upon the tent, and upon all the vessels, and upon the souls that were there, and

upon one who touches [

ordinary touching]

a bone or a hollow place

or a corpse or a grave”: “

A bone”—

this is a barley-grain-sized bone,

which imparts impurity through contact, although it does not impart impurity in a tent. “

Or a hollow place”—

this is a limb hollowed out from a living person, and it does not have

sufficient flesh

to heal [“

flesh as is proper”]. It imparts impurity through contact, although it does not impart impurity in a tent. “

Or a corpse”—

this is a limb hollowed out from a corpse,

which does not have sufficient flesh to heal; it imparts impurity through contact but does not impart impurity in a tent.

And concerning what is stated, “

or a grave”—

or a grave”—

Reish Lakish said:

This is a grave from before the pronouncement,

a grave from before the command of the Holy One, blessed be He, to Moses concerning corpse impurity; it imparts impurity through contact but does not impart impurity in a tent.

From here Reish Lakish learned that the Torah expanded the law of contact impurity to include a limb from a corpse even when it does not contain a barley-grain-sized bone, for:

This “

limb from a corpse,”

which was included with regard to contact impurity,

what are the circumstances?

If it contains a barley-grain-sized bone,

then

this is “

one who touches a bone,”

which we interpreted as referring to a barley-grain-sized bone.

Rather, it does not contain “

a barley-grain-sized bone”—

and even so the Torah expanded the law to include it;

we have therefore learned in accordance with the words of Reish Lakish.

And Rabbi Yoḥanan,

who holds that a limb from a corpse that does not have sufficient flesh upon it does not impart impurity even through contact by Torah law—

could say to you: Actually—

the limb from a corpse that was included with regard to contact impurity is speaking of a case

where it contains

a barley-grain-sized bone, and it imparts impurity through contact because of the barley-grain-sized bone in it.

As for your difficulty, “This is a bone,” there is no difficulty:

if the verse is not needed for its contact

with a barley-grain-sized bone, since we have already expounded it from “or a bone”—

apply it to its carrying

of a barley-grain-sized bone, which we have not yet learned.

Rabbi Akiva said: I presented the following argument before Rabbi Eliezer,

who would say—as we learned above, on page 54—that a nazirite does not shave for a quarter-log of blood, but only for half a log of blood:

But

if, with regard to a barley-grain-sized bone, which does not render a person impure through a tent,

it is nevertheless the case that

the nazirite shaves for contact with it and for carrying it—

As explained above in the Mishna, 49b.

with regard to a quarter-log of blood, which renders a person impure through a tent, is it not logical that the nazirite should shave for contact with it and for carrying it!?

a. The early authorities disagree: Some maintain that Rabbi Akiva holds that a nazirite shaves both for contact with and carrying a quarter-log of blood and for its tent-impurity, even though for a barley-grain-sized bone a nazirite shaves only for contact with and carrying, as explained above [49b]. Others maintain that just as for a barley-grain-sized bone a nazirite does not shave for its tent-impurity, so too for a quarter-log of blood, which is derived from a barley-grain-sized bone, he shaves only for contact with and carrying ; and the wording of the Tosafot below, 57a, s.v. “A bone,” indicates that a nazirite also shaves for its tent-impurity, and this is likewise apparent from their words above, 52a, s.v. “That came.” However, their wording above, 53b, s.v. “There,” implies that he shaves only for contact and carrying, although this is not conclusive

He said to me

Rabbi Eliezer:

What is this, Akiva!?

And behold,

one does not derive here by means of a kal va-chomer,

for one does not derive a kal va-chomer from a halakha, and the Gemara explains it.

And when I came and presented the matter before Rabbi Yehoshua, he said to me:

Indeed,

you spoke well, but this is what they said: it is a halakha

given to Moses from Sinai.