1) (Vayikra 11:37) ("And if there fall of their carcass on any variety of seed which is sown, what is sown, it is clean.") "And if there fall of their carcass": There is of their carcass which imparts tumah, and there is of their carcass which does not impart tumah. This excludes a dried up carcass, which cannot (return to its moistness) by soaking. 2) Whence is it derived that seeds which were tamei, which were sown, are clean? From "what is sown it is clean." I might think that this is so even if it did not take root; it is, therefore, written "it is" (i.e., if it did not take root, it remains in its original state of tumah.) 3) "And if there fall of their carcass on any variety of seed which is sown, what is sown, it is clean. (Vayikra 11:38): And if water be placed upon a seed, and aught of their carcass fall on it, it is unclean to you.": There are in this (formulation numerous variables): seeds that are tamei and seeds that are clean, rooted to the ground and uprooted from the ground, placing (of water on the seed) by man and placing by Heaven, (seed for) human consumption and (seed for) animal consumption. Distinctions must be made. If you say the rooted are tamei and the uprooted are clean, you have made everything unclean! (for everything was originally rooted.) And if you say the rooted are clean and the uprooted are tamei, you have made a part tamei and a part clean. 4) If you say that "by Heaven" they are tamei and "by man" they are clean, you have made everything "tamei" (for it is impossible that no water fell upon them from the time they were uprooted.) And if you say "by Heaven" they are clean and "by man" they are tamei, you have made some tamei and some clean. If you say that for animal consumption they are tamei and for human consumption they are clean, you have made everything tamei (for all seed is fit for animal consumption). And if you say that for human consumption they are tamei and for animal consumption they are clean, you have made some tamei and some clean. 5) "And if water be placed upon a seed": This teaches us that a sheretz does not confer tumah upon a seed until it has been conditioned (to acquire it by water). — (But why is a verse needed for this?) Can it not be derived inductively? viz.: An earthen vessel confers tumah and a sheretz confers tumah. Just as an earthen vessel confers tumah upon seed only after it (the seed) has been conditioned by water (viz. Vayikra 11:34), so a sheretz confers tumah upon seed only after it has been conditioned. — Would you say such a thing? If you are lenient with an earthen vessel (which is only of first-degree tumah [rishon letumah]), would you be lenient with a sheretz (which is proto-tumah [av hatumah])? You would say that it confers tumah whether or not the seed has been conditioned! It is, therefore, written "And if water be placed … it is tamei," to teach us that a sheretz confers tumah upon seed only after it has been conditioned. 6) This tells me (of susceptibility to tumah) only after conditioning by water. Whence do I derive for inclusion other liquids, like water? It follows a fortiori, viz.: If with earthen vessels, the lesser (tumah, i.e., rishon,) other liquids are equated with water (Vayikra 11:34), then with sheretz, the grave (tumah, i.e., av,) how much more so should other liquids be equated with water! — But, perhaps go in this direction — earthen vessels are the graver, for (even) their atmosphere confers tumah, (as opposed to sheretz, which confers tumah only through touch). It is, therefore, written "water"-"water" (to cerate an identity [gezeirah shavah]). "Water" is written above (Vayikra 11:34) and "water" is written below (here). Just as with "water" above, other liquids are equated with water, so, with "water" below other liquids are equated with water. 7) A different a fortiori argument (to equate other liquids with water, so that the question remains: Why is a verse needed for this?), viz.: If water (that is tamei), which returns to its "father" (water) to become clean, (through "hashakah, ["leveling" with clean water]), (yet it) conditions seed (to contract tumah), then (other) liquids, which do not return to their "father" to become clean — how much more so should they condition seed (to contract tumah)! — No, this may be so with water, which becomes an av hatumah to confer tumah upon the man (who carries it), and upon his clothing (in the instance of the sprinkling waters of the red heifer), as opposed to (other) liquids, which do not become an av hatumah to this end. And since they do not become an av hatumah to this end, (I would say that) they do not condition seed (to contract tumah. It must, therefore, be written "water"-"water," etc. 8) Whence is it derived that thought (i.e., desiring the water that has fallen upon the seed in the instance of sheretz) is equivalent to placing (it there, for purposes of its contracting tumah?) And it follows a fortiori that it should be so, viz.: If with earthen vessels, the lesser (tumah [see Vayikra 11:6) above]), thought is equivalent to placing, then with sheretz, the graver (tumah), how much more so should thought be equivalent to placing! — But, perhaps go in this direction — earthen vessels are the graver, for (even) their atmosphere confers tumah, (as opposed to sheretz, which confers tumah only through touch). It is, therefore, written "water"-"water" (to create an identity [Gezeirah shavah]). "Water" is written above (Vayikra 11:34) and "water" is written below (here). Just as with "water" above, thought is equivalent to placing, so, with "water" below, thought is equivalent to placing. 9) This tells me only of water having been placed upon the seed and still being there. Whence do I derive (the same for) its having dried? From (Vayikra 11:34) "It is tamei to you" (in any event). "It is tamei to you": all that is for your needs, including the stems of foods (by which they are held), whence they said: The stem of the vine (acquires tumah) a tefach on one side and a tefach on the other. The spine of the bunch, whatever it be. The tail of the bunch, sharikna (whatever it be, of the berries). The stem of the "broom" of the palm, four tefachim. The reed of the ear, three tefachim. The "handle" of all that is cut, three. And what is not the practice to cut, whatever it be. And the outer husks of grains. I might think (that this is so) even if they were trodden in the threshing floor; it is, therefore, (to exclude these) written "It (and not what is attached to it) is tamei to you."
Sifra Shemini Chapter 11
Tap any verse to see what it echoes — and start a chain or echo from it.