Another leniency TB Nazir 64

Starting on yesterday’s daf and continuing on today’s daf TB Nazir 64 we learn a new leniency when it comes to tumah, ritual impurity or what I call ritual unreadiness. We don’t often have a chance to learn about the nitty-gritty details of  tumah and tahara. Before we begin today’s daf we have to remember certain laws concerning tumah.

1.     “וְכׇל סְפֵק טוּמְאָה בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים סְפֵיקוֹ טָהוֹר.-And the guiding principle in any case of uncertainty with regard to impurity in a public domain is that its uncertainty is ruled to be ritually pure.” The definition of a public domain is three or more people.

2.     “וכל ספק טומאה ברשות היחיד ספקה טמא-the guiding principle in any case of uncertainty involving impurity in a private domain is that the item with uncertain status is deemed impure.” The definition of a private domain is two or less people.

3.     Unlike a corpse, a dead creeping animal defined as a sheretz (שֶּׁרֶץ) can only make a person tamei through touching it.

With these rules in mind we can appreciate the leniency discussed in the Gemara. The case is the following. A nazir goes into a cave to immerse himself in the water. This water is a natural mikva, ritual bath. The cave is a private domain. In the water he sees a dead sheretz floating in the water. There is a doubt whether he touched it or not. Is this person tamei?

“How does one differentiate between a known and an unknown impurity? If a nazirite descended to immerse in a cave, and a corpse was found floating at the mouth of the cave, he is impure. The Gemara comments: A floating impurity does not render a person or item impure in the case of a carcass of a creeping animal (a sheretz -שֶּׁרֶץ). As it is taught in a baraita (Tosefta, Teharot 5:6): With regard to the case of uncertain impurity, where an item might have touched something impure that was floating, either in water in a vessel or in water in the ground, e.g., a well, the item is pure. Rabbi Shimon says: If the impurity was floating in water that was in a vessel, the item is impure; if the impurity was in water in the ground, it is pure.

“What is the reason of the first tanna for declaring that in all uncertain cases of floating impurity the person or item remains pure? Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Avudimi says: In the passage dealing with the impurity of creeping animals and the prohibition of eating them it is written: “With any swarming thing that swarms” (Leviticus 11:43), indicating that a carcass of a creeping animal renders items impure in any place where it swarms. And it is written: “All swarming things that swarm upon the earth” (Leviticus 11:42), indicating that it transmits impurity only if it is on the earth. How so? How can one reconcile these two verses? Definite contact with it renders one impure; one who has uncertain contact with it, e.g., the impurity is floating, remains pure.

"The Gemara asks: And Rabbi Shimon, what is the reason for his opinion? Ulla said that as it is written: “Nevertheless a fountain or a cistern in which there is a gathering of water shall be pure” (Leviticus 11:36), this indicates that a creeping animal found in one of these places does not impart impurity. And it is written in the same verse: “He who touches their carcass shall be impure until evening,” which indicates that it does render one impure. How so? If the impurity was floating in water contained in vessels, the item it touched is rendered impure, but if the water was in the ground itself, e.g., in a spring or pit, the item it touched is pure.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Everybody agrees that if the sheretz isn’t grounded then in a doubtful case the person remains tahor, pure or ritually ready. The debate is over what is considered being grounded. The halakha follows the first tanna. If the sheretz is floating in the water or in a cup in the water and there is a doubt whether they person touched the sheretz, he remains tahor.