Study Sanhedrin folio 88A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
with regard to a case where there is a spread of tzara'at in garments that culminates with the garment’s being completely covered with leprous marks that the garment is pure, just as it is with regard to tzara'at of a person?
Karaḥat and gabbaḥat are stated with regard to tzara'at of a person (see Leviticus 13:42), in the sense of baldness on the back of one’s head and forehead, and karaḥat and gabbaḥat are stated with regard to tzara'at of garments (see Leviticus 13:55), in the sense of the newer and the older sections
“Matters of”; these are the valuations, and the dedications, and the consecrations. The Talmud elaborates: In the case of valuations, the dispute concerning such a prohibition is with regard to the issue that is the subject of the dispute between R' Meir and the Rabbis, as we learned in a baraita:
In the case of dedications, the dispute concerning such a prohibition is with regard to the issue that is the subject of the dispute between R' Yehuda ben Beteira and the Rabbis, as we learned in a Mishnah (Arakhin 28b): R' Yehuda ben Beteira says: Dedications dedicated without specification of the
And the Rabbis say: Dedications dedicated without specification of their purpose are designated for the priest, as it is stated with regard to one who consecrated a field and did not redeem it: “As a field dedicated; to the priest shall be its possession” (Leviticus 27:21). If so, why must the verse