meta: {"file": "/data/tomer/Sefaria-Export/txt_done/Mishnah/Seder Tahorot/Mishnah Negaim/English/merged.txt"}
text: Mishnah Negaim
  משנה נגעים
  merged
  
  This file contains merged sections from the following text versions:
  -Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp
  -
  
  Mishnah Negaim
  
  
  
  
  
  The signs of negaim are two which, in fact, are four. The bright spot (baheret) is bright white like snow; secondary to it is the sign as white as the lime of the Temple. The rising (se'et) is as white of the skin of an egg; secondary to it is the like white wool, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: the rising (se'et) is white wool and secondary to it is like the white of the skin of an egg.
  The variegation of the snow-like whiteness is like wine mixed with snow. The variegation of the lime-like whiteness is like blood mixed with milk, the words of Rabbi Ishmael. Rabbi Akiva says: the reddishness in either of them is like wine mixed with water, only that in the snow-like whiteness the color is bright while in that of lime-like whiteness it is duller.
  These four colors combine with each other to declare free [from uncleanness], to certify or to shut up. "To shut up" one who is at the end of the first week; "To declare free [from uncleanness]", one who is at the end of the second week. "To certify", one in which a discoloration or white hair arose, by the end of the first week, by the end of the second week or after it had been declared free [from uncleanness]. "To certify", when a spreading arose in it by the end of the first week, by the end of the second week or after it had been declared free [from uncleanness]. "To certify", when all one's skin turned white after it had been declared free from uncleanness; "To declare free from uncleanness’, when all one's skin turned white after the sign had been certified unclean or after it had been shut up. These are the colors of signs of negaim upon which depend all decisions concerning negaim.
  Rabbi Hanina, the vice-chief of priests, says: the colors of negaim are sixteen. Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas says: the colors of negaim are thirty-six. Akaviah ben Mahalalel says: seventy-two. Rabbi Hanina the vice-chief of priests says: negaim may not be inspected for the first time at the end of Shabbat, since the end of that week will fall on Shabbat; Nor on a Monday, since the end of the second week will fall on Shabbat; Nor on a Tuesday, in the case of houses, since the end of the third week will fall on Shabbat. Rabbi Akiva says: they may be inspected at all times, and if the time for the second inspection falls on Shabbat it is postponed to after Shabbat; and this procedure leads sometimes to a leniency and sometimes to a stringency.
  How does it lead to a leniency?If the nega had two white hairs and one white hair disappeared. If there were two white hairs and they turned black. If one hair was white and the other black and both turned black. If they were long and then they became short. If one was long and the other short and both became short. If a boil adjoined both hairs or one of them. If the boil surrounded both hairs or one of them. Or if they were separated from each other by a boil, the quick flesh of a boil, a burning, or the quick flesh of a burning, or a white scurf. If it had undiscolored flesh and this undiscolored flesh disappeared. If it was square and then became round or elongated. If it was encompassed and then moved to the side. If it was united and then it was dispersed. Or a boil appeared and made its way into it. If it was encompassed, parted or lessened by a boil, the quick flesh of a boil, a burning, the quick flesh of a burning, or a white scurf; If it had a spreading and then the spreading disappeared; Or the first sign itself disappeared or was so lessened that both are less than the size of a split bean; Or if a boil, the quick flesh of a boil, a burning, the quick flesh of a burning, or a  white scurf, formed a division between the first sign and the spreading Behold these lead to a leniency in the law.
  How does it lead to a stringency?If it had no white hairs and then white hairs appeared; If they were black and then turned white; If one hair was black and the other white and both turned white; If they were short and they became long; If one was short and the other long and both became long. If a boil adjoined both hairs or one of them, if a boil encompassed both hairs or one of them or if they were parted from one another by a boil, the quick flesh of a boil, a burn, or the quick flesh of a burn, or white scurf, and then [one of these things] disappeared. If it had no quick flesh and then quick flesh appeared. If it was round or long and then became four sided; If it was at the side and then it became encompassed. If it was dispersed and then it became united or a  boil appeared and made its way into it. If it was encompassed, parted or lessened by a boil, the quick flesh of a boil, a burn, the quick flesh of a burn or white scurf, and then they disappeared; If it had no spreading and then a spreading appeared; If a boil, the quick flesh of a boil, a burn, the quick flesh of a burn, or white scurf formed a division between the first sign and the spreading and then they disappeared. Behold all of these lead to a stringency.
  
  
  
  The bright spot in a German appears as dull white, and the dull white spot in an Ethiopian appears as bright white. Rabbi Ishmael says: the children of Israel (may I be atonement for them!) are like boxwood, neither black nor white but of an intermediate shade. Rabbi Akiva says: painters have materials with which they portray figures in black, in white, and in an intermediate shade; let, therefore a paint of an intermediate shade be brought and applied around the outside of the nega, and it will then appear as on skin of intermediate shade. Rabbi Judah says: in determining the colors of negaim the law is to be lenient and not stringent; let,therefore, the negaim of the German be inspected on the color  of his own body  so that the law is lenient, and let that of the Ethiopian be inspected as if it were on the intermediate shade so that the law is also lenient. The sages say: both are to be treated as if the nega was on the intermediate shade.
  Negaim may not be inspected in the early morning or in the evening, nor in a house, nor on a cloudy day, because then the dull white appears like bright white; nor may they be inspected at noon, because then the bright white appears like dull white. When are they to be inspected? During the third, fourth, fifth, eighth or ninth hour, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah ruled: during the fourth, fifth, eighth or ninth hour.
  A priest who is blind in one eye or the light of whose eyes is dim should not inspect negaim; for it says, "Wherever the priest's eyes can see" (Leviticus 13:12). In a dark house one may not open up windows in order to inspect his nega.
  What is [the posture] of examining negaim?A man is inspected in the posture of one that hoes or one that gathers olives. And a woman [is inspected in the posture] of one who is arranging dough and one who nurses her child, and one that weaves at an upright loom if the nega was in the right armpit. Rabbi Judah says: also in the posture of one that spins flax if it was within the left armpit. Just as [is the posture] for examining for the nega, so too [is the posture] for shaving hair.
  All negaim may be examined by a person, except his own. Rabbi Meir ruled: not even the negaim of his relatives. All vows may be released by a person, except his own. Rabbi Judah says: not even those vows of his wife that affect relationships between her and others. All firstlings may be examined by a person, except his own firstlings.
  
  
  
  Everyone can become impure from negaim, except for a non-Jew and a resident alien. All are qualified to inspect negaim, but only a priest may declare them unclean or clean. He is told, "Say: 'unclean,'" and he repeats "unclean," or "Say: 'clean,'" and he repeats "clean." Two negaim may not be inspected simultaneously whether in one man or in two men; rather he inspects one first and isolates him, certifies him as unclean or pronounces him clean, and then he inspects the second. One who is isolated may not be isolated again nor may one who is certified unclean be certified unclean again. One who is certified unclean may not be isolated nor may one who is isolated be certified unclean. But in the beginning, or at the end of a week, he may isolate on account of the one nega and isolate him on account of another one; he may certify him unclean on account of one sign and also certify him unclean on account of another sign; he may isolated the one sign and declare the other clean, or certify the one unclean and declare the other clean.
  A bridegroom on whom a nega has appeared is given the seven days of the marriage feast [in which he is not examined]; [This grace period is given to] him, and to his house and to his clothing. Similarly during a festival, one is granted exemption from inspection during all the days of the festival.
  The skin of the flesh becomes unclean for two weeks and by one of three signs: by white hair or by quick flesh or by a spreading. "By white hair or by quick flesh" in the beginning, at the end of the first week, at the end of the second  week, or after it had been pronounced clean. "Or by a spreading," at  the end of the first week, at the end of the second week,   or after it had been pronounced clean. It becomes unclean for two weeks which are thirteen days.
  A boil or a burn becomes unclean for one week and by one of the following two tokens: by white hair or by a spreading. By white hair, in the beginning, at the end of the week, or after it has been pronounced clean. "Or by a spreading:" At the end of the week, or after it had been declared clean. They become unclean for a week which is seven days.
  Head or beard (scall) negaim become unclean for two weeks and by one of the following two signs: by yellow thin hair or by a spreading. "By yellow thin hair" in the beginning, at the end of the first week, at the end of the second week, or after they have been pronounced clean. "Or by a spreading," at the end of the first week, at the end of the second week or after they have been pronounced clean. They become unclean for two weeks which are only thirteen days.
  Scalp baldness or forehead baldness [negaim] become unclean for two weeks and by one of the following two signs: by quick flesh or by a spreading. "By quick flesh," in the beginning, at the end of the first week, at the end of the second week, or after they have been pronounced clean. "Or by a spreading," at the end of the first week, at the end of the second week, or after they have been pronounced clean. They become unclean for two weeks which are only thirteen  days.
  Garments become unclean for two weeks and by one of three signs: by a greenish color, by a reddish color or by a spreading. "By a greenish colour or by a reddish color," in the beginning, at the end of the first week, at the end of the second week, or after they have been pronounced clean. "Or by a spreading," at the end of the first week, at the end of the second week, or after they have been pronounced clean. They become unclean for two weeks which are but thirteen days.
  Houses become unclean for three weeks and by one of the following three signs: by a greenish color or by a reddish color or by a spreading. "By a greenish color or by a reddish color," in the beginning, at the end of the first week, at the end of the second week, at the end of the third week, or after they have been pronounced clean. "Or by a spreading," at the end of the first week, at the end of the second week, at the end of the third week, or after they have been pronounced clean. They become unclean for three weeks which are nineteen days. None of the leprosy signs is for less than a week or for more than three weeks.
  
  
  
  There are [laws] that apply to the white hair that do not apply to the spreading, while others apply to the spreading and do not apply to the white hair. That white hair causes uncleanness at the beginning, it causes uncleanness whatever the state of its whiteness, and it is never a sign of cleanness. There are laws that apply to the spreading, for the spreading causes uncleanness however small its extent, it causes uncleanness for all negaim and even when it is outside the nega, and these laws do not apply to the white hair.
  There are [laws] that apply to the quick flesh that do not apply to the spreading, while other restrictions apply to the spreading  and do not apply to the quick flesh. That quick flesh causes uncleanness at the beginning, it causes uncleanness whatever its color, and it is never a sign of cleanness. There are [laws] that apply to the spreading, for the spreading causes uncleanness however small  its extent, it causes uncleanness in all forms of negaim and also where it is outside the leprosy sign, and these laws do not apply to the quick flesh.
  There are [laws] that apply to white hair that do not apply to quick flesh, while others apply to quick flesh and not to white hair. White hair causes uncleanness in a boil and in a burn, whether growing together or dispersed, and whether encompassed or unencompassed. There are [laws] that apply to quick flesh, for quick flesh causes uncleanness in scalp baldness and in forehead baldness, whether it was turned or was not turned, it prevents the cleanness of one who is turned all white, and causes uncleanness whatever its color, and these do not apply to white hair.
  If the two hairs were black at the root and white at the tip he is clean. If they were white at the root and black at the tip he is unclean. How much whiteness must there be? Rabbi Meir says: any amount. Rabbi Shimon says: enough to be cut with a pair of scissors. If it was single at the root but split at the tip, and it looks like two hairs, he is clean. If a bright spot had [two] white hairs or black hair he is unclean, for we are not concerned that the place of the black hair lessened the space of the bright spot, since the former is of no consequence.
  If a bright spot was of the size of a split bean and a string extended from it, if it was two hairs in breadth, it is subject to the restrictions in respect of white hair and spreading, but not to that in respect of its quick flesh. If there were two bright spots and a streak extended from one to the other, if it was two hairs in breadth, it combines them; but if not, it does not combine them.
  If a bright spot the size of a split bean had within it quick flesh the size of a lentil and there was white hair within the quick flesh: if the quick flesh disappeared the spot is unclean on account of the white hair; if the white hair disappeared it is unclean on account of the quick flesh. Rabbi Shimon makes it clean, since it was not the bright spot that caused it [the hair] to turn [white]. If a bright spot together with the quick flesh in it was of the size of a split bean and there was white hair within the spot: if the quick flesh disappeared the bright spot is unclean on account of the white hair; if the white hair disappeared it is unclean on account of the quick flesh. Rabbi Shimon says that it is clean, since it was not a bright spot the size of a split bean that caused the hair to turn [white]. He agrees that if where the white hair was, was the size of a split bean, that it is impure.
  A bright spot which had quick flesh and a spreading: if the quick flesh disappeared it is unclean on account of the spreading; if the spreading disappeared it is unclean on account of the quick flesh. So also in the case of white hair and a spreading. If it [the bright spot] disappeared and appeared again at the end of the week, it is regarded as though it had remained as it was. If it reappeared after it had been pronounced clean, it must be inspected as a new one. If it had been bright white but was now dull white, or if it had been dull white but was now bright white, it is regarded as though it had remained as it was, provided that it does not become less white than the four principal colors. If it contracted and then spread, or if it spread and then contracted: Rabbi Akiva rules that it is unclean; But the sages rule that it is clean.
  A bright spot the size of a split bean, and it spreads to the extent of half a split bean, while of the original spot there disappeared as much as half a split bean: Rabbi Akiba says: it must be inspected as a new one, But the sages say: it is clean.
  A bright spot the size of a split bean that spread to the extent of half a split bean and a little more, while as much as half the size of a split bean disappeared from the original spot: Rabbi Akiva says that it is unclean, But the sages say that it is clean. A bright spot the size of a split bean that spread to the extent of a split bean and a little more, while the original spot disappeared: Rabbi Akiva says that is it unclean, But the sages say: it should be inspected as a new one.
  A bright spot the size of a split bean spread to the extent of a split bean, and in the spreading there appeared quick flesh or white hair, while the original spot disappeared: Rabbi Akiva says: it is unclean. But the sages say: it must be inspected as a new one. A bright spot the size of half a split bean with nothing in it, and then there appeared a bright spot the size of half a split bean and with one hair, this is to be isolated. A bright spot the size of half a split bean with one hair and then there appeared another spot of the size of a half a split bean with one hair, this is to be isolated. A bright spot the size of half a split bean with two hairs and another spot of the size of half a split bean appeared with one hair, this is to be isolated.
  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. 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. Rabbi Joshua regards this as unsolvable.
  
  
  
  Any doubtful nega is regarded as clean, except this case and one other. Which is that? If he had a bright spot of the size of a split bean and he was isolated, and by the end of the week it was as big as a sela, and it is doubtful whether it is the original one or whether another came in its place, he must be regarded as unclean.
  If one had been certified unclean on account of white hair, and the white hair disappeared and other white hair appeared, And so also in the case of quick flesh or a spreading, Whether this occurred in the beginning, at the end of the first week, at the end of the second week, or after he had been released from uncleanness, he is regarded as being in the same position as before. If he had been certified unclean on account of quick flesh, and the quick  flesh disappeared and other quick flesh appeared, And so also in the case of white hair and spreading, Whether this occurred in the beginning, at the end of the first week, at the end of the second week, or after the man had been released from uncleanness, he is regarded as being in the same position as before. If he had been certified unclean on account of a spreading, and the spreading disappeared and another spreading appeared, And so also in the case of white hair, Whether this occurred at the end of the first week, at the end of the second week, or after the man had been released from uncleanness, he is in the same position as before.
  Deposited hair: Akaviah ben Mahalalel holds it is unclean. But the sages hold it to be clean. What is "deposited hair"? If one had a bright spot with white hair in it, and the bright spot disappeared leaving the white hair in position and then it reappeared: Akaviah ben Mahalalel holds it to be unclean, But the sages hold it to be clean. Rabbi Akiva said: in this case I agree that he is clean; But what is "deposited hair"?   If one had a bright spot of the size of a split bean with two hairs in it, and a part the size of a half a split bean disappeared leaving the white hair in the place of the white spot and then it reappeared. They said to him: just as they rejected the ruling of Akaviah so is there no validity in your ruling.
  Any doubt in negaim in the beginning is regarded as clean before uncleanness has been established, but after uncleanness has been established a doubt is regarded as unclean. How is this so? If two men came to a priest one having a bright spot the size of a split bean and the other having one of the size of a sela, and at the end of the week each had one the size of a sela, and it is not known on which of them the spreading had occurred, Whether this occurred with one man or with two men, each is clean. Rabbi Akiva said: if one man is involved he is unclean, but if two men are involved each is clean.
  "But after uncleanness has been established a doubt is regarded as unclean." How so? If two men came to a priest, one having a bright spot of the size of a split bean and the other having one of the size of a sela and at the end of the week each was of the size of a sela and a little more, both are unclean; And even though both returned to be the size of a sela both are unclean, and remain unclean until they return to the size of a split split bean. They is what they meant when they said, "but after uncleanness has been established a doubt is regarded as unclean."
  
  
  
  The minimum size of a bright spot must be that of a Cilician split bean squared. The space covered by a split bean equals that of nine lentils. The space covered by a lentil equals that of four hairs; It turns out that the size of a bright spot must be no less than that of thirty-six hairs.
  If a bright spot was of the size of a split bean and in it there was quick flesh of the size of a lentil: If the bright spot grew larger it is unclean, but if it grew smaller it is clean. If the quick flesh grew larger it is unclean, and if it grew smaller it is clean.
  A bright spot the size of a split bean and in it there was quick flesh less than the size of a lentil: If the bright spot grew larger it is unclean, but if it grew smaller it is clean. If the quick flesh grew larger it is unclean, but if it grew smaller, Rabbi Meir rules that it is unclean; But the sages rule that it is clean, since a nega cannot spread within itself.
  If a bright spot was larger in size than a split bean and in it there was quick flesh larger than a lentil, irrespective of whether they increased or decreased, they are unclean, provided that they do not decrease to less than the prescribed minimum.
  If a bright spot was the size of a split bean and quick flesh the size of a lentil encompassed it, and outside the quick flesh there was another bright spot, the inner one must be isolated and the outer one must be certified unclean. Rabbi Yose says: the quick flesh is not a sign of uncleanness for the outer one, since the inner bright spot is within it. If it decreased or disappeared: Rabban Gamaliel says: if its destruction was on its inner side it is a sign of spreading of the inner bright spot while the outer one is clean, but if its destruction was on its outer side, the outer one is clean while the inner one must be isolated. Rabbi Akiva says: in either case it is clean.
  Rabbi Shimon said: when is this the case?  When the quick flesh was exactly the size of a lentil. But if it was larger than a lentil, the excess is a sign of spreading of the inner one, and the outer one is unclean. If there was white scurf less that the size of a lentil, it is a sign of the spreading of the inner bright spot but it is not a sign of spreading of the outer one.
  There are twenty-four tips of limbs in the human body that do not become unclean on account of quick flesh: the tips of the fingers and the toes, the tips of the ears, the tip of the nose, the tip of the penis; and also the nipples of a woman. Rabbi Judah says: also those of a man. Rabbi Eliezer says: also warts and warts with thin necks do not become unclean on account of quick flesh.
  The following places in a person do not become unclean on account of a bright spot: the inside of the eye, the inside of the ear, the inside of the nose and the inside of the mouth, wrinkles, wrinkles in the neck, under the breast and the armpit, the sole of the foot, the nails, the head and the beard; and a boil, a burn and a blister that are festering. All these: Do not become unclean on account of negaim Do not combine with other negaim, A nega is not considered to spread into them, Do not become unclean on account of quick flesh, And they do not act to prevent a person from being considered to have turned completely white. If subsequently a bald spot arose in the head or beard, or if a boil, a burn or a blister formed a scar: They may become unclean by negaim, But they do not combine with other negaim, A nega is not considered to spread into them, And they do not become unclean on account of quick flesh. But they do act to prevent a person from being considered to have all turned white. The head and the beard before they have grown hair, and warts with thin necks on the head or the beard, are treated as the skin of the flesh.
  
  
  
  The following bright spots are clean:Those that one had  before the Torah was given, Those that a non-Jew had when he converted; Or a child when it was born, Or those that were in a crease and were subsequently uncovered. If they were on the head or the beard, on a boil, a burn or a blister that is festering, and subsequently the head or the beard became bald, and the boil, burn or blister turned into a scar, they are clean. If they were on the head or the beard before they grew hair, and they then grew hair  and subsequently became bald, or if they were on the body before the boil, burn or blister before they were festering and then these formed a scar or were healed: Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said that they are unclean since at the beginning and at the end they were unclean, But the sages say: they are clean.
  If their color changed, whether to be lenient or stringent: How is it "to be lenient"? If it was white like snow and it became white like the lime of the Temple, or like wool or like the skin of an egg, or [as white] as the second shade of a rising or the second shade of bright white. How is it "to be stringent"? If it was the color of the skin of an egg and it became like white wool, the lime of the Temple or like snow. Rabbi Eliezer ben Azariah rules that they are clean. Rabbi Eliezer Hisma says:  if the change was to be lenient it is clean, but if it was one to be stringent it must be inspected as if it were a new one. Rabbi Akiva says: whether the change was to be lenient or to be strict it must be inspected as if it were a new one.
  A bright spot in which there were no signs of uncleanness: At the beginning, or at the end of the first week, he is isolated; At the end of the second week or after it had been pronounced clean, he is pronounced clean. If while the priest was about to isolate him or to pronounce him clean, signs of uncleanness appeared in it, he certifies him as unclean. A bright spot in which there are signs of uncleanness, he certifies him as unclean. If while the priest was about to certify it as unclean the signs of uncleanness disappeared: If at the beginning, or at the end of the first week, he isolates him; But if at the end of the second week or after the spot had been pronounced clean, he is pronounced clean.
  One who plucks out signs of uncleanness or burns quick flesh transgresses a negative commandment. And as regards cleanness: If they were plucked out before he came to the priest, he is clean; But if after he had been certified as unclean, he remains unclean. Rabbi Akiva said: I asked Rabban Gamaliel and Rabbi Joshua while they were on the way to Narbata, "What is the ruling if the plucking occurred while he was isolated?" They said to me, "We did not hear anything [about this case], but we have heard that if they were plucked before he came to the priest he is clean, and if after he had been certified as unclean he remains unclean." I began to bring them proofs: whether the man stands before the priest or whether he is isolated, he is clean unless the priest had pronounced him unclean. When does he attain cleanness [after he has been certified unclean]? Rabbi Eliezer says: after another nega arises in him and he has attained cleanness  after it. But the sages says: only after another nega has spread over his whole body or after his bright spot has been reduced to less than the size of a split bean.
  If one had a bright spot and it was cut off, he becomes clean; If he cut it off intentionally: Rabbi Eliezer says: [he is clean] only after another nega arises in him and he has attained cleanness after it. But the sages say: only after it has spread over all his body. If it was on the tip of one's foreskin, he should be circumcised.
  
  
  
  If a nega broke out completely upon one who was unclean, he becomes clean; If the ends of his limbs reappeared, he becomes unclean until the bright spot is reduced to less than the size of a split bean. [If it broke out completely upon him] when he was clean, he becomes unclean; If the ends of his limbs reappeared, he remains unclean until his bright spot resumes its former size.
  A bright spot the size of a split bean in which there was quick flesh the size of a lentil and then it broke out covering a person's entire skin and then the quick flesh disappeared, or if the quick flesh disappeared and then the bright spot broke out covering all his skin, he is clean. If quick flesh arose [subsequently], he is unclean. If white hair grew [subsequently]: Rabbi Joshua rules that he is unclean, But the sages rule that he is clean.
  A bright spot in which there was white hair and then it broke out covering his entire skin, even though the white hair remained in its place, he is clean. A bright spot in which there was a spreading and then it broke out covering his entire skin, he is clean. But in all of these cases if [even] the ends of the his limbs reappeared [in their natural color], he is unclean. If it broke out covering a part of his skin he is unclean; If it broke out covering all his skin he is clean.
  In all cases of breaking out and covering the ends of the limbs whereby the unclean have been pronounced clean, if they reappeared they become unclean again. In all cases of reappearance of the ends of the limbs whereby the clean have been pronounced unclean, if they were covered again these become clean again. If subsequently they become uncovered these are unclean, even if this occurs a hundred times.
  Any part [of the body] that can be subject to the uncleanness of a bright spot nega can prevent the effectiveness of the breaking out [over the entire body], and any part that cannot be subject to the uncleanness of a bright spot nega does not prevent the effectiveness of the breaking out abroad. How so? If it broke out covering all of his skin, but not on the head or the beard, or on a festering boil, burn or blister, and then the head or the beard became bald, or the boil, burn or blister turned into a scar, he is clean. If it broke out covering all of his skin, except a spot of the size of half a lentil near the head or beard, or near a boil, burn or blister, and then the head or the beard became bald, or the boil, burn or blister turned into a scar, even though the place of the quick flesh became a bright spot, he is unclean unless it breaks out covering all his body.
  If there were two bright spots, one unclean and the other clean, and they broke out from one to the other, and then [a nega] broke out covering all of his skin, he is clean. [If the bright spots] were on his upper lip and lower lip, or on two of his fingers, or on his two eyelids, even though they cleave together and appear as one, he is clean. If it broke out covering all his skin except white scurf, he is unclean. If the ends of his limbs reappeared in the color of white scurf, he is clean. If the ends of his limbs reappeared to the extent of less than a lentil: Rabbi Meir rules that he is unclean, But the sages rule that a piece of white scurf less in size than a lentil, is a sign of uncleanness in the beginning, but it is not a sign of uncleanness at the end.
  One who came [in front of the priest] with all his body white is isolated. If white hair grew, he is certified unclean. If both hairs or one of them turned black, If both or one of them became short, If a boil adjoined both or one of them, If a boil surrounded both or one of them, Or if a boil, the quick flesh of a boil, a burn, the quick flesh of a burn, or white scurf divided them [he is pure]. If quick flesh or white hair arose, he is unclean; But if neither quick flesh nor white hair arose he is clean. In all these cases if the ends of his limbs reappeared he remains as he was before. If the nega broke out, covering a part of him, he is unclean. If it broke out covering all of them, he is clean.
  If it broke out covering all of his skin all at once: If this originated in a condition of cleanness, he is unclean; But if it originated in a condition of uncleanness, he is clean. One who becomes clean after having been isolated is exempt from the uncovering his head and rending his clothes, from shaving his hair and from bringing the birds. If he becomes clean after he had been certified unclean, he is liable to all these. Both convey uncleanness by entering.
  If one came with his whole body white, and on it there was quick flesh to the extent of a lentil, and then the nega spread out covering all his skin, and then the ends of his limbs reappeared: Rabbi Ishmael says: this is the same as when the ends of the limbs reappear in that of a large bright spot. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah ruled: as when the ends of the limbs  reappeared in a small bright spot.
  There is one who shows his nega [to the priest] and thereby gains advantage, while there is one who shows and loses. How so? If one was certified unclean and the signs of his uncleanness disappeared, and before he could show it to the priest the nega broke out covering all his skin, he is clean; whereas if he had shown it to the priest he would have been unclean. If he had a bright spot in which there was nothing else, and before he could show it to the priest it broke out covering all his skin, he is unclean; whereas if he had shown it to the priest he would have been clean.
  
  
  
  A boil or a burn may become unclean in a week and by two signs: by white hair or by a spreading. What is a "boil"? An injury received from wood, stone, peat, or the waters of Tiberias, of from any other object whose heat is not due to fire is a  boil. What exactly is a "burn"? A burn caused by a live coal, hot embers, or any object whose heat is due to fire is a burning.
  A boil and a burn do not combine, nor do they spread from one to the other, nor do they spread from there to the skin of the flesh, nor does [a nega] on the skin of the flesh spread to them. If they were festering they are clean. If they formed a scale as thick as garlic peel, such is the scar of the boil that is spoken of in the Torah. If they were subsequently healed, even though there was a mark in their place, they are regarded as the skin of the flesh.
  They asked R. Eliezer: "[What is the ruling concerning] one who had a bright spot the size of a sela form on the inside of his hand and it covered up the scar of a boil?" He replied: "He should be isolated." They said to him: "Why? Since it is neither capable of growing white hair nor can it effectively spread nor does quick flesh cause it to be unclean?" He replied, "It is possible that it will contract and then spread again." They said to him, "But what about when its only the size of a split bean?' He said to them: I have not heard anything. Rabbi Judah ben Batera said to him, "Can I teach something about this?" He replied, "If you would thereby confirm the ruling of the sages, go ahead." He said, "Lest another boil would arise outside it and spread into it. He replied: "You are a great scholar for you have confirmed the words of the sages."
  
  
  
  Scalls may become unclean for two weeks and by two signs: by thin yellow hair and by spreading. By thin yellow hair: means stunted and short, the words of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri said: even though it is long. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri said: what is the meaning of the expression when people say, "This stick is thin," or "This reed is thin"? Does "thin" imply that it is stunted and short and not stunted and long? Rabbi Akiva replied: before we learn from the reed let us learn from hair, [for they say] "So and so's hair is thin": "thin" means that it is stunted  and short and not stunted and long.
  Yellow thin hair causes uncleanness whether it is clustered together or dispersed, whether it is encompassed or unencompassed, or whether it came after the scall or before it, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Shimon says: it causes uncleanness only when it came after the scall. Rabbi Shimon said: Is it not logical: if white hair, against which other hair affords no protection, causes uncleanness only when it comes after the nega, how much more should yellow thin hair, against which other hair does afford protection, cause uncleanness only when it comes after the scall? Rabbi Judah says: Whenever it was necessary to say, "it turns" Scripture says, "it turns." But the scall, since about it Scripture says, "there is no yellow hair in it," it causes uncleanness whether it came before or after it.
  [Black hair] that sprouts up affords protection against yellow hair and against a spreading, whether it was clustered together or dispersed, whether it was encompassed or unencompassed. And that which is left [over from before the scall] affords protection against yellow hair and against a spreading, whether it is clustered together or dispersed, and also when encompassed, but it affords no protection where it is at the side unless it is distant from the standing hair by the place of two hairs. If one hair was yellow and the other black, or if one was yellow and the other white, they afford no protection.
  Yellow hair that preceded a scall is clean. Rabbi Judah says that it is unclean. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: it neither causes uncleanness nor does it afford protection. Rabbi Shimon says: anything in a scall that is not a sign of uncleanness is a sign of cleanness.
  How does one shave who has a scall? He shaves outside it and leaves next to it two hairs in order to determine whether it spreads. If he was certified unclean on account of yellow hair, and then the yellow hair disappeared and other yellow hair appeared, and so also if there was a spreading,   irrespective of whether the certification took place at the beginning, at the end of the first week, at the end of the second week or after his release from uncleanness, behold he remains as he was before. If he was certified unclean on account of a spreading, and the spreading disappeared and then reappeared, and so also if there was yellow hair, irrespective of whether the certification took place at the end of the first week, at the end of the second week or after his release from uncleanness, he remains as he was before.
  Two scalls side by side and a line of hair separating between them: If a gap opened up in one place he is unclean, But if it opened up in two places he is clean. How big should the gap be?  The space of two hairs. If there was a gap in one place, even though it is as big as a split bean, he is unclean.
  Two scalls one within the other and a line of hair separating between them: If there appeared a gap in one place the inner one is unclean, But if in two places it is clean. How big must the gap be?  The space of two hairs. If there was a gap in one place of the size of a split bean he is clean.
  One who has a scall with yellow hair within it is unclean. If subsequently black hair grew in it, he is clean; even if the black hair disappeared again he remains clean. Rabbi Shimon ben Judah says in the name of Rabbi Shimon: any scall that has once been pronounced clean can never again be unclean. Rabbi Shimon says: any yellow hair that has once been pronounced clean can never again be unclean.
  If one had a scall the size of a split bean and it spread over all his head he becomes clean. The head and the beard do not prevent [one another], the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Shimon says: they do prevent. Rabbi Shimon said: Is there not a logical inference: if the skin of the face and the skin of the body, between which something intervenes, do prevent [one another], the head and the beard, between which nothing intervenes, should they not also prevent [one another]? The head and the beard do not combine, nor is a spreading from one to the other effective. What exactly counts as the beard? From the joint of the jaw to the thyroid cartilage.
  Scalp baldness (karahat) or forehead baldness (gabahat) may become unclean in two weeks and by two signs: by quick flesh or by spreading. What constitutes baldness? If one ate neshem or smeared himself with neshem or had a wound from which hair can no longer grow. What is the extent of scalp baldness? From the crown sloping backwards to the protruding cartilage of the neck. What is the extent of forehead baldness? From the crown sloping forwards to the region facing the hair above. Scalp baldness and forehead baldness cannot be combined, nor is spreading from one to the other effective. Rabbi Judah says: if there is hair between them they cannot be combined, but if there is none they must be combined.
  
  
  
  All garments can contract the uncleanness of negaim except those of non-Jews. One who buys garments [with signs of negaim] from non-Jews they must be inspected as if the signs had then first appeared. The hides [of animals] of the sea do not contract the uncleanness of negaim. If one joined to them anything which grows on land, even if it is only a thread or a cord, as long as it is something that is susceptible to uncleanness, they also become susceptible to uncleanness.
  Camel's wool and sheep's wool that have been hackled together: If the majority is camel's hair, they are not susceptible to negaim; But if the majority is sheep's wool they are susceptible to negaim. If it is half and half they are susceptible to negaim. And the same law applies also to linen and hemp that have been hackled together.
  Colored hides and garments are not susceptible to negaim. Houses whether they are colored or not colored, are susceptible to negaim, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: hides are like houses. Rabbi Shimon says: those that are naturally [colored] are susceptible to uncleanness but those that are artificially [dyed] are not susceptible to uncleanness.
  A garment whose warp was colored and whose woof was white, or whose woof was colored and whose warp was white, all depends on what is most visible. Garments contract uncleanness if they are an intense green or an intense red. If [the nega] was green and it spread out red, or if it was red and it spread out green, it is unclean. If its color changed and then it spread, or if it changed and it did not spread, it is regarded as if it had not changed. Rabbi Judah says: let it be inspected as if it then appeared for the first time.
  [A nega] that remained unchanged during the first week must be washed and isolated. One that remains unchanged during the second week must be burned. One that spread during the first or the second week must be burned. If it becomes dimmer in the beginning: Rabbi Ishmael says: it should be washed and isolated. But the sages say: he is not required [to do so]. If the nega became dimmer during the first week it must be washed and isolated. If it became dimmer during the second week it must be torn out, and that which is torn out must be burnt, and it is necessary for a patch to be put on. Rabbi Nehemiah says: a patch is not necessary.
  If the nega reappears on the garment, the patch is protected. If it reappears on the patch the garment must be burned. One who makes a patch from a garment that was isolated and then pronounced pure, and then the nega reappeared on the garment, the patch must be burned. If it reappeared on the patch, the first garment must be burned, and the patch serves the second garment while the two signs are under observation.
  A screen that had colored and white stripes, a nega may effectively spread from one to the other. They asked Rabbi Eliezer: But the white stripe is separate? He replied: I have heard no ruling on this question. Rabbi Judah ben Batera said to him: Shall I derive the answer? He replied: If this would confirm the words of the sages, then yes! He said back: It is possible that it would remain on it in an unchanged condition for two weeks, and that which remains unchanged on garments for two weeks is unclean. He said to him: You are a great sage, for you have confirmed the words of the sages. A spreading that is close [to the original nega is effective] however small it may be. One that is distant [is effective only] if it is of the size of a split bean. And one that reappears [is effective only if it is] of the size of a split bean.
  The warp and the woof can contract the uncleanness of negaim immediately. Rabbi Judah says: the warp, only after it has been boiled, but the woof immediately. And bundles of flax after they have been bleached. How much must there be in a coil for it to be capable of contracting the uncleanness of negaim? Enough to weave from it a piece of three fingerbreadths square, either warp  or woof, even if it is all warp or all woof. If it consisted of broken threads it does not contract the uncleanness of negaim. Rabbi Judah says: even if the thread was broken only in one place, and he knotted together, it does not contract the uncleanness of negaim.
  One who winds [a thread] from one coil to another, or from one spool to another, or from the upper beam to the lower beam, and so also in the case of the two sides of a shirt, if a nega appears on the one, the other remains clean. If it appears on the shedded woof or on the standing warp, they become susceptible to the uncleanness of negaim immediately. Rabbi Shimon says: the warp may contract uncleanness only if it is closely ordered.
  [If a nega] appeared on the standing warp, the already woven cloth remains clean. If it appeared on the already woven cloth, the standing warp remains clean. If it appeared on a sheet, he must also burn the fringes. If it appeared on the fringes the sheet remains clean. A shirt on which a nega appeared affords protection to its hems, even though they are of purple wool.
  Any object that is susceptible to corpse uncleanness, though not susceptible to midras uncleanness, is still susceptible to negaim uncleanness. For instance: the sail of a ship, a curtain, the forehead band of a hair-net, the wrappings of scrolls, a coiled belt, the straps of a shoe or sandal that are at least as wide as a split bean, Behold these are susceptible to the uncleanness of negaim. A thick cloak on which a nega appeared: Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: unless it appears on the texture and on the stuffing. A skin bottle or a shepherd's leather wallet are inspected in the position in which they are used, and a nega may effectively spread from its inner side to its outer side and from its  outer side to its inner side.
  If a garment that had been isolated was mixed up with others, all are clean. If it was cut up and made into shreds, it is clean, and benefit may be derived from it. But if a garment that had been certified unclean was mixed up with others, all are unclean. If it was cut up and made into shreds it also remains unclean and it is forbidden to have any benefit from it.
  
  
  
  All houses may contract negaim uncleanness, except those of non-Jews. If one bought houses from non-Jews, any it must be inspected as if they had then first appeared. A round house, a triangular house, or a house built on a ship, on a raft or on four beams, is not susceptible to negaim uncleanness. But if it was four-sided, even if it was built on four pillars, it is susceptible to uncleanness.
  A house, one of whose walls was covered with marble, with rock, with bricks or with earth, is pure. A house that did not have in it stones, wood or earth, and a nega appeared in it and  afterwards stones, wood and earth were brought into it, it remains clean. So also a garment in which there was no woven part that was three fingerbreadths square and a nega appeared in it and afterwards there was woven into it a piece of cloth three fingerbreadths square, it remains clean. A house does is not susceptible to negaim uncleanness unless there are in it stones, wood and earth.
  And how many stones must there be in it [for it to be susceptible to negaim]? Rabbi Ishmael says: four. Rabbi Akiva says: eight. For Rabbi Ishmael used to say: a nega is not a cause of uncleanness unless it appeared in the size of two split beans on two stones or on one stone. Rabbi Akiva say: unless it appears in the size of two split beans on two stones, and not on one stone. Rabbi Eliezer son of Rabbi Shimon says: unless it appears in the size of two split  beans, on two stones, on two walls in a corner, Its length being that of two split beans and its breadth that of one split bean.
  [And how much] wood [must be in the wall for it to susceptible]? Enough to be set under the lintel. Rabbi Judah says: it must suffice to make the support at the back of the lintel. [And how much] earth [must be in the wall for it to susceptible]? Such as would suffice to fill up the space between one row of stones and another. The walls of a cattle-trough or the walls of a partition are not susceptible to the uncleanness of negaim. A house in Jerusalem or in any place outside the land of Israel is not susceptible to the uncleanness of negaim.
  What is the procedure for the inspection of a house? "The owner of the house shall come and tell the priest, saying, "Something like a plague has appeared upon my house" (Leviticus 14:35). Even if he is a learned sage and knows that it is definitely a nega, he may not speak with certainty saying, "A plague has appeared upon my house," but rather, "Something like a plague has appeared upon my house." "The priest shall order the house cleared before the priest enters to examine the plague, so that nothing in the house may become unclean; after that the priest shall enter to examine the house." Even bundles of wood and even bundles of reeds [must be removed], the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Shimon said: clearing keeps him occupied. Rabbi Meir said: But which [of his goods] could become unclean? If you were to say, his articles of wood, of cloth or of metal, he could immerse them and they will become clean. What is it that the Torah has spared? His earthenware, even his cruse and his bucket. If the Torah thus spared a man's humble possessions, how much more so would it spare his cherished possessions! If for his material possessions, how much more so for the life of his sons and daughters! If for the possessions of a wicked man, how much more so for the possessions of a righteous one!
  [The priest] must not go into his own house to isolate it, nor may he stand within the house in which there is a nega. Rather, he must stand at the door of the house in which is there is a nega, and isolate it from there, as it is said, "The priest shall come out of the house to the entrance of the house, and close up the house for seven days" (Leviticus 14:38). He comes again at the end of the week and inspects the sign to see if it spread. "The priest shall order the stones with the plague in them to be pulled out and cast outside the city into an unclean place" (v.. "They shall take other stones and replace those stones with them, and take other dirt and plaster the house" (v.. He must not take stones from the one side and bring them to the other; nor earth from the one side and bring it to the other; nor lime from anywhere. He must not bring one stone to replace two, nor two to replace one. But he can bring two to replace two or to replace three or to replace four. From here they have said: Woe to the wicked, woe to his neighbor. Both must take out the stones, both must scrape the walls, and both must bring the new stones. He alone, however, brings the earth, as it is said, "And he shall take other coating and plaster the house."  His neighbor need not join with him in the plastering.
  He comes again at the end of the week and inspects the nega. If it has returned, "He shall break down the house, its stones, and its timber, and all the mortar of the house; and he shall carry them out of the city into an unclean place" (Leviticus 14:45). A spreading that adjoins [the original nega] is effective however small it may be; One that is distant must be no less than the size of a split bean. And a nega that returns in houses must be no less than the size of two split  beans.
  
  
  
  There are ten [laws concerning the negaim in] houses:(1 + If during the first week a nega became faint or disappeared, it must be scraped and is then clean. (3 + If during the second week it became faint or disappeared, it must be scraped and the owner must bring the birds. If it spread during the first week, the stones must be taken out and the wall scraped and plastered, and another week must be allowed. If it then returned the entire house must be pulled down; If it did not return, the birds must be brought. If it remained unchanged during the first week but spread during the second week, the stones must be taken out and the wall scraped and plastered, and another week must be allowed. If it then returned, the house must be pulled down; If it did not return the birds  must be brought. If it remained unchanged in both weeks, the stones must be taken out, and the wall scraped and plastered, and a week must be allowed. If it then returned the house  must be pulled down; If it did not return, the birds  must be brought. If before cleanness was attained through the birds a new nega appeared, the house must be pulled down; But if it appeared after cleanness through the birds had been attained, it must be inspected as if it had appeared for the first time.
  In the case of a stone in a corner, when the stone is taken out it, he must take it all out; But when [the house is] torn down he tears down his own [part] and leaves that which belongs to his neighbor. Thus it follows that there is a greater stringency for taking out than for tearing down. Rabbi Eliezer says: if a house is built of rows of head stones and small stones, and a nega appears on a head stone, all of it must be taken out; but if it appeared on the  small stones, he takes out his stones and leaves the others.
  A house in which a nega appeared if it had an upper chamber above it, the beams are considered part of the upper chamber. If the nega appeared in the upper chamber the beams are considered part of the lower room. If there was no upper chamber above it, its stones and wood and earth must be torn down with it. He may save the frames and the window lattices. Rabbi Judah says: a frame that is built over the house must be torn down with it. Its stones and wood and earth convey uncleanness if they are of the minimum size of an olive. Rabbi Eliezer Hisma says: whatever their size.
  A house that has been isolated conveys uncleanness from its inside; And one that has been certified unclean, both from its inside and from its outside. Both convey uncleanness  if one enters in.
  If one who builds in cleanliness with stones from a house that was isolated and the nega returned to the [former] house, the stones must be taken out. If it returned to the stones, the first house must be torn down, and the stones serve the second house while the signs are under observation.
  If a house overshadowed a house with a nega and so also if a tree overshadowed a house with a nega, anyone who enters the outer [of the two] remains clean, the words of Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah. Rabbi Eliezer said:  if one stone of it causes uncleanness by entering, should not the house itself cause uncleanness by entering?
  If an unclean person stood under a tree and a clean person passed by, the latter becomes unclean. If a clean person stood under a tree and an unclean one passed by, the former remains clean. If the latter stood still, the former becomes unclean. Similarly in the case of a leprous stone he remains clean. But if it was set down he becomes unclean.
  If a person who was clean put his head and the greater part of his body inside an unclean house, he becomes unclean. And if an unclean man put his head and the greater part of his body inside a clean house he causes it to be unclean. If he put three fingerbreadths square of a clean cloak into an unclean house, the cloak becomes unclean; And if he put even the size of an olive of an unclean [cloak] into a clean house, the house becomes unclean.
  If a person entered a house afflicted with a nega, carrying his clothes upon his shoulders, and his sandals and rings in his hands, both he and they become unclean immediately. If, however, he was wearing his clothes and had his sandals on his feet and his rings on his hands, he becomes unclean immediately, but they remain clean, unless he stayed as much time as is required for the eating of half a loaf of wheat bread and not of barley bread, while in a reclining posture and eating with some condiment.
  If he was standing inside, and he stretched his hands outside, with his rings on his hands, if he stayed [inside] as much time as is required for the eating of half a loaf, they become unclean. If he was standing outside, stretching his hands inside, with his rings on his hands: Rabbi Judah says that they are unclean immediately, But the sages say: only after he leaves them there as much time as is required for the eating of half a loaf. They said to Rabbi Judah: if when all his body is unclean he does not render that which is on him unclean unless he stayed there long enough to eat half a loaf, when all of his body is not unclean, is it not logical that he should not render that which is on him unclean unless he stayed there long enough to eat half a loaf?
  If a metzora entered a house all the vessels in it, even up to the roof beams, become unclean. Rabbi Shimon says: only up to a height of four cubits. Vessels become unclean immediately. Rabbi Judah says: only if the metzora stayed there as much time as is required for the lighting of a lamp.
  If he enters a synagogue, a partition ten handbreadths high and four cubits wide must be made for him. He should enter first and come out last. Any vessel that affords protection by having a tightly fitting cover in the tent of a corpse affords protection by a tightly fitting cover in the house of one afflicted by a nega, And whatsoever affords protection when covered in the tent of a corpse affords protection when covered in the house of one afflicted with a nega, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yose says:  any vessel that affords protection by having a tightly fitting cover in the tent of a corpse affords protection when covered in the house of one afflicted with a nega; and whatsoever affords protection when covered in the tent of  a corpse remains clean even when uncovered in a leprous house.
  
  
  
  How would they purify a metzora?A new earthenware flask and a quarter of a log of living water was put in it. Two undomesticated birds are also brought. One of these was slaughtered over the earthenware vessel and over the living water. A hole was dug and it was buried in his presence. Cedarwood, hyssop and scarlet wool were taken and bound together with the remaining ends of the strip of wool. Near to these were brought the tips of the wings and the tip of the tail of the second bird. All were dipped together, and sprinkled upon the back of the metzora's hand seven times. Some say that the sprinkling was done upon his forehead. In the same manner one would sprinkle on the lintel of a house from the outside.
  He now comes to set free the living bird. He does not turn his face towards the sea or towards the city or towards the wilderness, for it is said, "But he shall let the living bird go out of the city into the open field" (Leviticus 14:53). He now comes to shave off the hair of the metzora. He passes a razor over the whole of his skin, and he [the metzora] washes his clothes and immerses himself. He is then clean so far as to not convey uncleanness by entrance, but he still conveys uncleanness as does a sheretz. He may enter within the walls [of Jerusalem], but must keep away from his house for seven days, and he is forbidden to have intercourse.
  On the seventh day he shaves off his hair a second time in the manner of the first shaving, he washes his garments and immerses  himself. He is clean in so far as not to convey uncleanness as a sheretz, but he was still like a tevul yom. He may eat second tithe. After sunset he may eat terumah. After he had brought his offering of atonement, he may also eat sacred things. Thus there are three grades in the  purification of a metzora and three grades in the purification of a woman after child birth.
  There are three who must shave their hair, and their shaving of it is a commandment: the nazirite, the metzora, and the Levites. If any of these cut their hair but not with a razor, or if they left even two remaining hairs, their act is of no validity.
  With regard to the two birds: the commandment is that they be alike in appearance, in size and in price; and they must be purchased at the same time. But even if they are not alike they are valid; And if one was purchased on one day and the other the next they are also valid. If after one of the birds had been slaughtered it was found that it was not wild, a partner must be purchased for the second, and the first may be eaten. If after it had been slaughtered it was found to terefah, a partner must be purchased for the second and the first may be made use of. If the blood had been spilled out, the bird that was to be let go must be left to die. If the one that was to be let go died, the blood must be spilled out.
  The mitzvah of the cedarwood is for it to be one cubit in length, and in thickness a quarter of that of the leg of a bed, when one leg is divided into two halves and these two into four. The mitzvah of the hyssop is that it should be neither ezovyon (lavendula) nor blue hyssop nor Roman hyssop nor wild hyssop nor any kind of hyssop that has an accompanying name.
  On the eighth day he would bring three beasts: a sin-offering, a guilt-offering and a whole burnt-offering. And a poor man would bring a sin-offering of a bird and a burnt-offering of a bird.
  He comes to the guilt-offering and he puts his two hands on it. He then slaughters it. Two priests receive its blood, one in a vessel and the other in his hand. He who received it in the vessel proceeded to sprinkle it on the wall of the altar. The one who received it in his hand would approach the metzora. The metzora had in the meantime immersed himself in the chamber of the metzoraim. He would come and stand at the Nikanor gate. Rabbi Judah says: he did not require immersion.
  [The metzora] put in his head inside and [the priest] applied [the blood] to the tip of his ear; [He put in] his hand and [the priest] applied [the blood] to the thumb of his hand. [He put in] his foot and [the priest] applied [the blood] to the big toe of his foot. Rabbi Judah says: he put in all three at the same time. If he had no thumb on his hand or no big toe on his foot or no right ear he could never become clean. Rabbi Eliezer says: [the blood] is applied to the place where they were. Rabbi Shimon says: if he applied it to the left side, the obligation has been fulfilled.
  [The priest] then took some [of the contents] of the log of oil and poured it into his colleague's hand; And if he poured it into his own hand, the obligation is fulfilled. He then dipped [his right forefinger] in the oil and sprinkled it seven times towards the Holy of Holies, dipping it for every sprinkling. He then approached the metzora, to the same places that he applied the blood he now applied the oil, as it is said, "Over the same places as the blood of the guilt offering; 29 and what is left of the oil in his palm the priest shall put on the head of the one being cleansed, to make expiation for him before the Lord." (Leviticus 14:28-29). If he "put upon," he has made atonement, but if he did not "put upon," he did not make atonement, the words of Rabbi Akiba. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: these are but the remainders of the mitzvah. Whether he "put upon" or did not "put upon," atonement is made, only it is accounted to him as if he did not make atonement. If any oil was missing from the log before it was poured out it may be filled up again; if after it was poured out, other oil must be brought anew, the words of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Shimon says: if any oil was missing from the log before it was applied, it may be filled up; but if after it had been applied, other oil must be brought anew.
  If a metzora brought his sacrifice as a poor man and he became rich, or as a rich man and he became poor, all depends on the sin-offering, the words of Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Judah says: all depends on the guilt-offering.
  A poor metzora who brought the sacrifice of a rich man has fulfilled his duty; But a rich metzora that brought the sacrifice of a poor man has not fulfilled his duty. A man may bring a poor man's sacrifice for his son, his daughter, his slave or his female, and thereby enable them to eat of the offerings. Rabbi Judah says: for his wife also he must bring the sacrifice of a rich man; and the same applies to any other sacrifice to which she is liable.
  If the sacrifices of two metzoraim were mixed up and after the sacrifice of one of them had been offered one of the metzoraim died: this is what the men of Alexandria asked of Rabbi Joshua. He answered them: let him assign his possessions to another person, and bring the poor man's sacrifice.