Today we dive into the world of ritual purity. For those of us with extremely limited backgrounds in this area, even the concept is challenging. What is so special about a vessel? Is impurity just a grown-up version of cooties? Did this have anything at all to do with managing cleanliness? With curbing contagion? Taking the words at face value, I understand that things fall into different categories, again, and that those lines must be strictly maintained.
The rabbis spend much of the daf walking us through case examples to consolidate their opinions. Their two major points today are
1) sanctified objects have greater susceptibility to ritual impurity than more common objects, and
2) our intention to guard the purity of an object is critical
We learn about women who approach their rabbis to determine whether or not their handiwork is ritually impure. In both cases, the rabbis note that the women had not intended to guard for ritual purity. Lo and behold; upon questioning, both women had intermittently invited ritual impurity into their crafts.
Amud (b) ends with a new Mishna; a beginning for Perek III. It explains that sacrificial food is more susceptible to ritual impurity than teruma. This might seem surprising. Teruma must be ritually pure; it is fed to the priests. Sacrificial food is eaten by amei ha'aretz, people who do not take notice of these stringencies. Our rabbis teach us in a note that priests will be mindful of every bit that enters their mouths, while amei ha'aretz require greater protection from inadvertent sins. Thus sacrificial food must be that much more guarded from ritual impurity.
Details including wet/dry influences, different degrees of ritual impurity, the ability of vessels to transmit or protect one from ritual impurity... these concepts are described as well in today's daf. Hopefully we will be provided with more detailed instruction regarding these very complicated concepts as Chagiga continues.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment