Sukkah 6a (ו.) — the Talmud in English

However, if

he was wearing his garments,

his clothes,

and his shoes were on his feet, and his rings were on his fingers—

he becomes impure immediately,

as it is written: “And whoever enters the house shall be impure.”

And they,

his garments, shoes, and rings,

remain pure until he remains

in the house for the amount of time

required to eat half a loaf

of bread.

The measure of the time required to eat half a loaf is calculated specifically with

wheat bread,

which can be eaten easily and whose eating takes little time,

and not

with

barley bread,

whose eating takes longer.

The measure of the time required for eating is specifically the amount of time a person needs to eat the bread while

reclining,

when he is occupied with his meal and is not preoccupied with other matters; therefore, it is eaten quickly.

And the time needed to eat it

with

together with

a relish,

and not merely the time needed to eat it by itself, when it is dry, in which case eating it takes longer.

The Gemara continues to explain how the remainder of the verse is expounded to teach the measures of Torah law:

The word

“barley”

was also stated in the verse with regard to measures.

As we learned

[Oholot 2:3]:

A bone the size of a barley grain

from a corpse

transmits impurity through contact and carrying

[that is, if a person or a utensil touched a bone from a corpse measuring the size of a barley grain, or if a person carried a bone of that size from a corpse—even without touching it—he becomes impure].

But it does not transmit impurity

a bone the size of a barley grain from a corpse to a person or utensils located with it

in a tent

in this measure, until all the bones of the spine, or an entire skull, or bones from the majority of the number of a person’s limbs are present in the tent of the corpse, as explained in tractate Nazir.

Likewise,

“vine,”

was stated in this verse to teach us how, with regard to the laws of a nazirite, to measure the amount of grape seeds [or grape shoots or grape leaves] that the nazirite is prohibited from eating: it is

“the measure of a quarter-log of wine for a nazirite.”

That is, the quantity of grape seeds is measured according to “a quarter-log of wine,” and not according to a quarter-log of water, whose measure is smaller than that of a quarter-log of wine.

The method of measurement is as follows: He places the grape seeds and skins into a cup full of wine until a quarter-log of wine spills out of it. This is the quantity of grape seeds that, if a nazirite eats it, causes him to violate a prohibition.

This quantity is measured specifically using wine, which is thick and does not flow out quickly; rather, it heaps up at the rim of the cup more than water does. Therefore, when the grape seeds are measured using a cup of wine, one must place a greater quantity of grape seeds into the cup before the entire quarter-log of wine spills out than would be necessary if the measurement were made using a cup of water.

“Fig”

was used as the measure

of the size of a dried fig for carrying on Shabbat.

If one carries food or an object on Shabbat from a private domain into a public domain, in the measure of the size of a dried fig, he is liable.

“Pomegranate”

is stated in the Torah with regard to the measure of a hole in a wooden vessel: if a hole develops in a wooden vessel as large as a pomegranate, this wooden vessel is no longer considered a vessel with a receptacle and does not contract impurity, since it is no longer useful.

As we learned

[Kelim 17:1]:

All householders’ vessels

made of wood [and regarding wooden vessels there is a special provision, that they do not contract impurity unless they have a receptacle],

their measure

for holes that remove from them the status of a wooden vessel with a receptacle, with regard to contracting impurity, is the size of

“pomegranate-sized.”

This is because as long as the vessels have not been perforated to the extent of “what allows a pomegranate to emerge”—that is, so that a pomegranate can pass through the hole—a person still values them and uses them for pomegranates. Therefore, they still retain the status of vessels and contract impurity. But if they are perforated to the extent of “what allows a pomegranate to emerge,” they lose their status as vessels.

In what case is this said? With regard to householders’ vessels. But vessels intended for sale, even if they have been perforated by any-sized hole, are pure.

And from the conclusion of the verse,

“a land of olive oil and honey,”

the Sages expounded:

A land whose measures are all the size of olives.

The Gemara challenges this: Is it conceivable that

all its measures

are the size of olives?

Can this enter your mind? There are those that we stated

above that are not measured by an olive-size.

The Gemara explains:

Rather, say: Most of its measures are the size of olives.

For example, the impurity of a corpse, carrion, and the prohibition against forbidden fat and blood,

and piggul, notar, tamei, and the sciatic nerve.

“Honey”—

this refers to dates, which are sweet, and likewise to other types of sweet foods; their measure is

the size of a large date

[a date] for violating a prohibition if one eats them

on Yom Kippur.

Although the measure for eating throughout the Torah is an olive-size, on Yom Kippur one is liable to karet only if he eats the measure of a kakotевet, because the Torah made one liable only for eating an amount that settles a person’s mind. As it is stated: “And every soul that is not afflicted”; anyone who has not eaten the measure of a kakotевet has not had his mind settled and is still considered “afflicted.”

The Gemara proves from here:

Evidently,

the measures

are of Torah origin!

They are explicitly stated in the verse. Why, then, did you say that they are a halakha given to Moses from Sinai?!

The Gemara explains: All the measures mentioned above are not from the Torah; rather, they are a halakha given to Moses from Sinai.

The proof is as follows:

And can you understand it

that we learned the law of measures from this verse? Are

measures written

in the Torah?

Does the Torah explicitly state the measure of eating half a loaf? Or is it explicit in the verse that the time spent in a leprous house is measured by the time required to eat half a loaf of wheat bread, or any of the other laws that we learned above?

Rather,

all those measures that we learned

are halakhot

given to Moses from Sinai,

and the verse

[“a land of wheat and barley”] serves only as

a mere support.

Rav also said above: Interpositions—the laws of interposition in immersion—are a halakha given to Moses from Sinai.

The Gemara challenges: But

interpositions

are not a halakha given to Moses from Sinai; rather,

they are of Torah origin!

As it is written: “And he shall wash his flesh in water,”

the verse teaches

that there must not be anything interposed between him,

between the person immersing,

and the water?!

The Gemara answers: Indeed, the law of an interposition on his flesh is explained in the verse and is not a halakha given to Moses from Sinai. Rather,

when the halakha came, it came with regard to his hair.

There must not be anything interposed between his hair and the water.

In accordance with the statement of Rabba bar bar Ḥana,

who says that an interposition invalidates immersion even when the interposition is in the hair.

For Rabba bar bar Ḥana said:

If there was in his hair

a strand,

a single hair,

that was tied,

and he objects to this, as he does not want to have a knot in his hair,

it constitutes an interposition,

that tied strand constitutes an interposition during his immersion, since the water cannot enter the tied hair, and his immersion is invalid.

This law applies only when the knot is tightly secured and the water cannot enter it. Although the interposition affects only a minority of his body and therefore does not constitute a Torah-level interposition, the Sages decreed that his immersion is invalid, as will be explained below.

But if

three

hairs were tied together,

they do not constitute an interposition,

because the hair of three hairs tied together is coarse and is not tightly bound, so the water can enter the knot.

And if there were

two,

two hairs tied together,

I do not know

whether this constitutes an interposition or not.

The Gemara challenges: Why is it necessary to learn the law of an interposition in the hair from a halakha given to Moses from Sinai? After all, the law of an interposition in

his hair as well,

since he is required to immerse,

is of Torah origin?!

As it is written: “And he shall wash his flesh in water,”

and we expound:

“Et”

comes to include

that which is ancillary to his flesh. And what is it?

His hair,

which also requires immersion.

The Gemara answers: Rather,

when the halakha came

to Moses from Sinai, it came

for the teaching of Rabbi Yitzḥak.

For Rabbi Yitzḥak said:

Rabbi Yitzḥak lists several distinctions in the laws of interposition with regard to immersion: