Sifra 7.0.9

Metzora, Section 6

1) (Vayikra 14:37) ("And he shall see the plague-spot, and, behold, if the plague-spot is in the walls of the house, embedded (sheka'aroroth) deep green or deep red, and their appearance is lower than the wall,") "And he shall see the plague-spot": I might think (if he sees it to be the minimum size of) a garis; it is, therefore, written "And he shall see the plague-spot and behold, the plague-spot." We are hereby taught that the house does not become tamei with less than two garisin.

2) "in the walls": implying two. And below, (Vayikra 14:39), it is written [(instead of)] "wall," "walls," giving four, whereby we are taught that it becomes tamei only if it has four walls.

3) From here they ruled: A round house or a house of three walls are not subject to plague-spot uncleanliness.

4) I might think (that the meaning is that it is not subject to tumah) until the plague-spot) is seen on two walls; it is, therefore, written "and their appearance is lower than the wall" — even one wall. I might think even (if it appears) on one stone; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 14:40) "and they shall remove the stones" — not fewer than two. These are the words of R. Akiva. R. Yishmael says: "And they shall remove the stones" does imply two stones, but (Vayikra 14:37) "and their appearance is lower than the wall" implies that even one stone is sufficient. R. Elazar b. R. Shimon says: (For it to be subject to tumah) there must appear two garisin on two stones on two walls in one corner; its length, two garisin, and its width a garis.

5) "sheka'aroroth": embedded in their appearance (and not in actuality). "yerakrakoth or adamdamoth": the greenest of green, the reddest of red. "and their appearance is lower than the wall": their appearance and not their substance.

6) (Vayikra 14:38) "Then the Cohein shall go out of the house to the door of the house, and he shall shut up the house for seven days": I might think that he could go to his house and shut it up; it is, therefore, written "to the door of the house and he shall shut it up." If "to the door of the house," I might think that he could stand under the lintel and shut it up; it is, therefore, written "out of the house." How so? He stands at the side of the lintel and shuts it up.

7) And whence is it derived that if he (the Cohein) went to his house and shut it up or stood in his house and shut it up, that the shutting up is valid? From "and he shall shut up the house" — in any event.

8) (Vayikra 14:39) ("And the Cohein shall return on the seventh day and he shall see: If the plague-spot is spread on the walls of the house,") "on the seventh": I might think in the daytime or at night; it is, therefore, written "on the day," and not at night.

9) "If the plague-spot is spread": a spreading adjacent to the plague-spot — any amount. Whence is a distant spreading derived for inclusion? From "in the walls of the house." I might think any amount; it is, therefore, written here "plague-spot," and elsewhere (in respect to plague-spots in general) "plague-spot." Just as the latter are a garis; here, too, a garis.

10) In sum: an adjoining spreading, any amount; a distant (spreading), a garis.

11) "in the walls of the house": and not in the walls of its annex, and not in the walls of the stable, and not in the walls of the mechitzah, and not in the walls of the menorah (also types of structures around the house).