Nazir 65: Leniencies re: Tumah

Almost at the end of our masechet, we discuss three different Mishnaot regarding uncertainties of tumah, ritual impurity.  The first regards found corpses.  Secondly, we learn about instances where tzaara is uncertain.  Finally we are told about times when the status of a zav is uncertain.  Overall, our rabbis are attempting to address the difficulties that face nazirites when they come into contact with ritual impurity.

Corpses are primary sources of tamei.  We have previously learned that any indication of uncovering a graveyard leads to rulings of tamei and resulting difficulties.  Today, we learn that there are a number of situations that allow people to assume that they have not found a graveyard.  For example, bodies buried in sitting positions or with their heads between their knees are assumed to be Gentiles and do not impart tamei unless under a tent or touched directly.  Thus they are deemed to be of no threat - the corpses can be removed.  Other cases of uncertainty can be removed along with three fingerbreadths of surrounding dirt and/or wood chips.

Our second Mishna teaches that tzaara, skin diseases, are uncertain if we do not know whether a hair was white before or after the appearance of a white spot on the skin surrounding the hair.  In addition, if two people are isolated following the appearance of a possible spot of tzaara and one week later both are the same size, both people are considered to be ritually pure, tahor.  As long as there is uncertainty as to which blemish grew, we are uncertain as to the status of both - and both are understood to be 'safe' in the community.

Last, a Mishna teaches us about zavim.  There are seven questions asked of a potential zav: a man with penile discharge.  These are whether or not:
1) he has eaten or drunk something unusual
2) he has eaten or drunk too much
3) he has lifted a heavy burden
4) he has jumped 
5) he suffers from an illness
6) he has thought of something arousing (described as sexual intercourse)
7) he has witnessed something arousing (argued to be a sexy woman, an act of intercourse, or another sight).

These questions are asked after the first discharge.  At this point his status may be uncertain.  If he is held for a day and emits a second discharge, he is called a zav.  But if that discharge is determined to be due to one of the above external factors, he will not be held to the same standards than a woman at this point - after two discharges of blood, she is called a zava and faces the full consequences of that status.  A man might still be allowed to participate in the community following a second discharge. 

These 'uncertainties' allow us to understand the dilemmas facing our rabbis.  They could not be too stringent, and risk disruption of societal functioning, nor could they be too lenient and allow Jewish practice to dissolve.  We continue to face these same questions, albeit with different issues, in our daily Jewish lives.  We can hope that the leaders in our community have the wisdom to recognize how to best help maintain a thriving Jewish community.