היה לבוש כליו וסנדליו ברגליו וטבעותיו באצבעותיו הוא טמא מיד והן טהורים עד שישהה בכדי אכילת פרס פת חטין ולא פת שעורין מיסב ואוכל בליפתן
However, if he was dressed in his clothes, and his sandals were on his feet, and his rings were on his fingers, he immediately becomes ritually impure, but they, the clothes, sandals, and rings, remain pure until he stays in the house long enough to eat half a loaf of bread. This calculation is based on wheat bread, which takes less time to eat, and not on barley bread, and it relates to one who is reclining and eating it together with relish or a condiment, which hastens the eating. This is a Torah measurement connected specifically to wheat.
שעורה דתנן עצם כשעורה מטמא במגע ובמשא ואינו מטמא באהל
Barley is also used as a basis for measurements, as we learned in a mishna: A bone from a corpse the size of a grain of barley imparts ritual impurity through contact and by being carried, but it does not impart impurity by means of a tent, i.e., if the bone was inside a house, it does not render all the articles in the house ritually impure.
גפן כדי רביעית יין לנזיר
The halakhic measure determined by a vine is the quantity of a quarter-log of wine for a nazirite. A nazirite, for whom it is prohibited to drink wine, is liable to be flogged if he drinks that measure.
תאנה כגרוגרת להוצאת שבת
Fig alludes to the measure of a dried fig-bulk with regard to the halakhot of carrying out on Shabbat. One is liable for carrying food fit for human consumption on Shabbat, provided that he carries a dried fig-bulk of that food.
רמון דתנן כל כלי בעלי בתים שיעורן כרמונים
Pomegranate teaches the following measure, as we learned in a mishna: All ritually impure wooden vessels belonging to ordinary homeowners become pure through being broken, as broken vessels cannot contract or maintain ritual impurity. They are considered broken if they have holes the size of pomegranates.
(דברים ח, ח) ארץ זית שמן (ודבש) ארץ שכל שיעוריה כזיתים כל שיעוריה סלקא דעתך הא איכא הני דאמרינן אלא אימא שרוב שיעוריה כזיתים
The Sages interpreted: “A land of olive oil and honey,” as: A land, all of whose measures are olive-bulks. The Gemara poses a question: Does it enter your mind that it is a land all of whose measures are olive-bulks? But aren’t there those measures that we just mentioned above, which are not olive-bulks? Rather, say: A land, most of whose measures are olive-bulks, as most measures relating to forbidden foods, e.g., fats, blood, piggul, leftover sacrificial flesh, ritually impure food, and the sciatic nerve, are olive-bulks, as are the measures for a corpse to transmit impurity in a tent and for an animal carcass to transmit impurity through contact.
דבש ככותבת הגסה ביום הכפורים
Honey, i.e., dates from which date honey is extracted, also determines a measure, as with regard to eating on Yom Kippur, one is liable only if he eats a large date-bulk of food.
אלמא דאורייתא נינהו ותסברא שיעורין מי כתיבי אלא הלכתא נינהו וקרא אסמכתא בעלמא הוא
Apparently, all these halakhic measurements are derived from this verse in the Torah and are not halakhot transmitted to Moses from Sinai. The Gemara refutes this argument: And how can you understand it in that manner that all these measures are explicitly written in the Torah with regard to each of the halakhot mentioned above? Rather, they are halakhot that were transmitted to Moses from Sinai, and the verse cited is mere support for these halakhot, not a source.
חציצין דאורייתא נינהו דכתיב (ויקרא יד, ט) ורחץ (את בשרו) במים שלא יהא דבר חוצץ בינו לבין המים
Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi said earlier that Rav said that the halakhot governing interpositions that invalidate ritual immersion are halakhot transmitted to Moses from Sinai. The Gemara challenges this assertion: These, too, are written in the Torah, as it is written: “And he shall bathe his flesh in the water” (Leviticus 14:9), and the Sages derived that nothing should interpose between his flesh and the water. Apparently, the halakhot of interposition are derived from a verse in the Torah and not through oral tradition.
כי אתאי הלכתא לשערו כדרבה בר בר חנה דאמר רבה בר בר חנא נימא אחת קשורה חוצצת שלש אינן חוצצות שתים איני יודע
The Gemara answers: When the halakha transmitted to Moses comes to teach, it is not with regard to an interposition on one’s skin, which is indeed derived from verses in the Torah. Rather, it comes to teach that an interposition in one’s hair invalidates the immersion, in accordance with the opinion of Rabba bar bar Ḥana, as Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: A single hair [nima] tied in a knot interposes and invalidates the immersion. Three hairs tied together in a knot do not interpose, because three hairs cannot be tied so tightly that water cannot penetrate them. With regard to two hairs tied together in a knot, I do not know the halakha. This halakha with regard to hair is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai.
שערו נמי דאורייתא נינהו דכתיב ורחץ את בשרו במים את הטפל לבשרו ומאי ניהו שערו
The Gemara raises a difficulty: The halakha with regard to one’s hair is also written in the Torah, as it is taught in a baraita with regard to that which is written: “And he shall bathe [et besaro] his flesh in the water.” The superfluous word et comes to include that which is subordinate to his flesh, and what is that? That is his hair. The fact that, like the body, there can be no interposition between one’s hair and the water is also derived from a verse.
כי אתאי הלכתא לכדרבי יצחק דאמר רבי יצחק
The Gemara answers: When the halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai comes to teach, it is not with regard to an interposition in one’s hair, which is indeed derived from a verse in the Torah. Rather, it comes to teach in accordance with the statement of Rabbi Yitzḥak, as Rabbi Yitzḥak said: