M. omits : b. Isaac.
I.e. he must take the earliest opportunity to remove them.
Judaism enjoins the duty of maintaining the body in a healthy condition.
Through a hole in the wall or fence, his body being outside.
I.e. the organs through which breath is taken, the mouth and nose. So long as these are not in the unclean place, praise may be offered.
I.e. limbs; they all have to be clean or in a clean place.
I.e. there is filth lying about.
M. : remove himself to a place where the smell is imperceptible and read.
In the vicinity of filth.
M. : stands.
Under any circumstances.
The excrement of these animals was used for cleaning purposes; cf. T. A.I. p. 154 and p. 574 n. 346.
I.e. it is not caused by excrement but breaking of wind. May one read the Shema'?
Although some of the sleepers may cause a foul odour, others are studying, an indication that the Shema' may be read under such conditions.
The cases are not analogous ; he must remove himself from the odour before reading the Shema'.
E.g. a leper.
According to Abbai, this is analogous to the quoted Baraita ; so if the passing leper does not cause defilement, the passing manure should not interfere with the reading of the Shema'.
Cf. Lev. xiv. 37 ff. If the stone is carried past a man, he is not infected ; if it is set down where he is, he does contract defilement.
What reply can he make to the reasoning upon which Abbai bases his view?
The analogy is false, because the quoted Mishnah only means to teach that the leper defiles any place where he stands for a while, which thus becomes temporarily his "dwelling."
The circumstance of the passing manure and saying the Shema'.
I.e. not only must the spot where he is standing be holy but the surroundings also.
Since the pig constantly pokes its snout amidst filth.
The presumption being that there is no excrement in the room, but there is in the ash-heap.
M. : Johanan.
That in v. 13 there is no mention of covering as in v. 14.
Geniba had wrongly reported the teaching of Rab.
That Rab permits the Shema' when the moisture had dried, and not when all trace had disappeared, as Geniba reported him.
M. : Rabbah b. Bar Hannah said in the name of R. Johanan.
So M. ; not as edd.: Judab. On Difti, see p. 48 n. 2.
If so, he would be able to read the Shema'.
By the sun, wben it has fallen on stone.
This conclusion contradicts Raba's statement of the Halakah.
And thus the quoted Baraita would be self-contradictory !
But that is impossible, since his opinion must be different, it being mentioned in contrast to that of the first Tanna.
This is to be connected with the opening sentence of the paragraph. It denies that the question here discussed is the same as that before considered.