daf bit: Shevuot 17

[cellio]

The mishna teaches that if you are in the temple and discover (or remember) that you are in a state of ritual impurity, you must leave immediately. It holds liable to punishment one who "tarries" or who goes out by the longer way instead of by the shorter way. The g'mara proceeds to discuss tarrying and, on today's daf, the longer versus shorter way.

Abaya asked Rabbah: if he went out the longer way but did it in the time it would normally take to go out the shorter way, is he liable? The principle he is trying to get at is: is it the distance or the time? Rabbah responded that the law is that if he goes out the longer way he is liable; Rabbah argues for distance. R. Zera objected to this ruling (using an argument I do not follow) but was overruled. (17a)

Tangentially, this daf also has what I think is my first sighting of a rabbi being afraid to state his opinion. R. Oshala says he wishes to state a law but is afraid of his associates. Of what, exactly, he is afraid is not stated. (He then goes on to state the law and the talmud does not report any dire consequences.)

Comments

[dragonazure.livejournal.com]

I realize this is serious scholarship (and I am often intrigued by these posts), but I think the scholars are missing an very important point: Don't disrupt the ritual. The principle seems obvious: Leave by the most expedient and least disruptive route.

'Longer' and 'shorter' are therefore highly subjective and must be evaluated in context. To put it more humorously, if leaving by the shortest distance results in a bunch of Excuse me! Pardon me! Coming through!, I would think the longer route would be allowed and therefore prefered.

[cellio]

That's a good point. Thanks.