[א] "ושרף את הבגד או את השתי או את הערב בצמר או בפשתים" – יכול יביא גיזי צמר ואניצי פשתן וישרפם עמה? ת"ל "היא באש תשרף" – אינה צריכה דבר אחר לישרף עמה. 1) (Vayikra 13:52) ("And he shall burn the garment, or the warp, or the woof, of wool or of flax, on any article of skin in which the plague-spot will be; for it is blight-leprosy — it shall be burned in fire.") "And he shall burn, etc.": I might think that he should bring shearings of wool and stalks of flax and burn them along with it; it is, therefore, written "it shall be burned in fire" — nothing else need be burned along with it.
[ב] אם כן למה נאמר ב"צמר או בפשתים"? להוציא את האמריות. 2) If so, why is it written "of wool or of flax"? To exclude (from the requirement of burning) appendages (to the garment, which are not subject to plague-spot uncleanliness.)
[ג] אוציא את האימרין של שיראים ושל זהב שאין מינן מיטמא בנגעים ולא אוציא את של ארגמן ושל זהורית טובה שמינם מיטמא בנגעים? ת"ל "אשר יהיה בו הנגע" – הראוי לקבל נגע. 3) I would then exclude appendages of silk and of gold, whose kind (silk and gold) are not subject to plague-spot uncleanliness, but I would not exclude (wool) of purple and crimson, whose kind, (wool) is subject to plague-spot uncleanliness. It is, therefore, written "in which the plague-spot will be found," i.e., which is subject to plague-spot (uncleanliness — to exclude dyed wool ["purple and crimson" above], which is not subject to plague-spot uncleanliness).
[ד] "ואם יראה הכהן והנה לא פשה הנגע בבגד… או בכל כלי עור" – זה העומד. "וצוה הכהן וכבסו" – הצוואה בכהן, והכיבוס בכל אדם. 4) (Vayikra 13:53) "And the Cohein shall see, and, behold, the plague-spot has not spread in the garment, or in the warp or in the woof, or in any article of skin": This refers to the stationariness (omed) of the plague-spot, (and not to the non-appearance of a different plague-spot). (Vayikra 13:54) ("Then the Cohein shall command, and they shall wash what contains the plague-spot, and he shall quarantine it a second seven days.") "Then the Cohein shall command and they shall wash": the command, by the Cohein; the washing, by any man.
[ה] "וכבסו… הנגע" – יכול נגע לבד? ת"ל "אשר בו הנגע". אי וכבסו אותו יכול הבגד כולו? ת"ל "אשר בו" – הא כיצד? יכבס מן הבגד עמו. 5) "and they shall wash … the plague-spot": I might think the plague-spot alone; it is, therefore, written "what contains the plague-spot." How so? Some of the adjoining material is washed with it.
[ו] "והסגירו שבעת ימים שנית" – מלמד שיום השביעי עולה לו מן המנין, בין מלפניו בין מלאחריו 6) "and he shall quarantine it a second seven days": We are hereby taught that the seventh day is included in the count — both before it and after it (i.e., the last of the first seven, and the first of the second seven.)
[ז] "וראה הכהן אחרי הכבס… והנגע לא פשה טמא" – הא אם לא הפך ולא פשה טמא. הפך ולא פשה איני יודע מה יעשה לו… ת"ל "והסגירו שבעת ימים שנית דברי ר' יהודה. וחכמים אומרים טמא אינו אלא משום עומד. הא מה אני מקיים "והנה לא הפך הנגע את עינו ולא פשה טמא"? הפך – טמא בכל מין שהוא מטמא לו. 7) (Vayikra 13:55) ("And the Cohein shall see, after the plague-spot has been washed, and, behold, the plague-spot has not changed its appearance, and the plague-spot has not spread, it is unclean. In fire shall you burn it; it is p'cheteth in its karachath or in its gabachath.") "after the plague-spot has been washed, and, behold, the plague-spot has not changed its appearance and the plague-spot has not spread, it is unclean.": If it has not changed and not spread, it is tamei; but if it changed and did not spread, it should be examined as in the beginning. These are the words of R. Yehudah. And the sages say: It is tamei by reason of omed (viz. Vayikra 13:4 above). How, then, am I to understand "and, behold, it has not changed"? From any appearance that renders it subject to tumah (even if it changed from green to red).
[ח] "פחתת" – שיהיו כל מראיה שוקעים. או אינו פחתת אלא כמראה שני? כשהוא אומר "הוא" הרי הוא כמות שהיתה, הא מה אני מקיים "פחתת" שיהיו כל מראיה שוקעים. 8) "pcheteth": all of it appearing to be indented. — But perhaps only second-degree (dimness) is intended! — "It" ("It is pcheteth") indicates that it is as it was before. How, then, am I to understand "pcheteth"? As connoting (all of) it appearing to be indented.
[ט] "בקרחתו" – אלו השחקים. "בגבחתו" אלו החדשים. מיכן אמר סגוס שנראה בו נגע – ר' אליעזר בן יעקב אומר עד שיראה בארוג ובמוכין. 9) "in its karachath": This refers to frayed (garments); "or in its gabachath": This refers to new (garments) — whence they ruled: sagus (a very thick cloak) on which a plague-spot appears — R. Eliezer b. Yaakov says: Until it appears in its weaving and its tufts.
[י] "וראה הכהן והנה כהה הנגע" – כהה למראה שני. או כהה למראה ג'? ת"ל "הנגע". אי "הנגע" יכול במראיו? ת"ל "והנה כהה", הא כיצד? למראה שני ולא כהה למראה שלישי. 10) (Vayikra 13:56) "And if the Cohein saw, and, behold, the plague-spot became dim after it was washed": second-degree dimness (e.g., deep green to green), or third-degree dimness (e.g., deep green to neutral)? It is, therefore, written "and, behold, the plague-spot became dim" (i.e., even though it is dim, it is still called "plague-spot." — If "plague-spot," I might think that it retained its original appearance (but just changed color [e.g., from deep green to deep red]); it is, therefore, written "and, behold, it became dim." How so? (It changed from) first degree to second degree, and not to third degree.