Mishneh Torah — Admission into the Sanctuary הלכות ביאת מקדש, Chapter 3

מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה לְשַׁלֵּחַ כָּל הַטְּמֵאִים מִן הַמִּקְדָּשׁ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר ה ב) "וִישַׁלְּחוּ מִן הַמַּחֲנֶה כָּל צָרוּעַ וְכָל זָב וְכל טָמֵא לָנָפֶשׁ":

It is a positive commandment to send all impure persons away from the Temple, (positive commandment 31) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 362) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. as [Numbers 5:2] states: "And they shall send away from the camp all those with tzara'at and zav [afflictions] and all those who are impure because of contact with a corpse.

זֶה הַמַּחֲנֶה הָאָמוּר כָּאן הוּא מַחֲנֵה שְׁכִינָה שֶׁהוּא מִפֶּתַח עֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל וְלִפְנִים. שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי שֶׁהַמְצֹרָע וְהַזָּב וּטְמֵא מֵת שְׁלָשְׁתָּן בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר בִּמְצֹרָע (ויקרא יג מו) "בָּדָד יֵשֵׁב מִחוּץ לַמַּחֲנֶה מוֹשָׁבוֹ" זֶה מַחֲנֵה יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁהוּא מִפֶּתַח יְרוּשָׁלַיִם וּלְפָנִים. מָה מְצֹרָע שֶׁטֻּמְאָתוֹ חֲמוּרָה חָמוּר שִׁלּוּחוֹ מִשִּׁלּוּחַ חֲבֵרוֹ. אַף כָּל שֶׁטֻּמְאָתוֹ חֲמוּרָה חָמוּר שִׁלּוּחוֹ מִשִּׁלּוּחַ חֲבֵרוֹ. לְפִיכָךְ מְשַׁלְּחִין אֶת הַמְצֹרָע חוּץ לִשְׁלֹשָׁה מַחֲנוֹת שֶׁהוּא חוּץ לִירוּשָׁלַיִם. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מְטַמֵּא בְּבִיאָה. מַה שֶּׁאֵין הַזָּב מְטַמֵּא:

"The camp" cited refers to "the camp of the Divine presence," i.e., from the entrance to the Courtyard of the Israelites onward. 7:11 which states:The [encampment of the Jewish people] in the desert [was divided into] three areas:the camp of Israel... the camp of the Levites about which [Numbers 1:50] states: "They shall camp around the Sanctuary;", and the camp of the Shechinah [which included the area] beginning at the entrance to the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting inwards.Correspondingly, for [future] generations: [The area] from the entrance to Jerusalem to the Temple Mount is comparable to the camp of Israel. [The area] from the entrance to the Temple Mount until the entrance to the Temple Courtyard, the gate of Nicanor, is comparable to the camp of the Levites. And [the area] from the entrance to the Temple Courtyard inward, is comparable to the camp of the Shechinah.See also the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 1:8). Should one infer that a person with tzaraat or zav ailments and one impure due to contact with a corpse are all three sent to the same place? With regard to one inflicted with tzara'at, [Leviticus 13:46] states: "He shall abide alone outside the camp where he dwells." [The camp from which he is sent] refers to the camp of the Israelites which parallels the area from the entrance to Jerusalem and beyond. [From this we conclude,] understands this to be an example of the principle of Biblical exegesis: A subject (a person impure because of tzara'at) was included in a general category (impure people) and then was singled out to teach us a new law (that he must dwell separate from all others). This does not only teach us about this instance, but about the entire category (that there are distinctions in the extent people with impurity must distance themselves). just like a person who is afflicted with tzara'at, because his impurity is more severe, is sent away in a more severe manner than others, so too, any individuals whose state of impurity is more severe than others should be sent out in a more severe manner.Therefore a person afflicted with tzara'at is sent outside of all three camps, i.e., outside of Jerusalem. [His impurity is considered more severe,] because he causes [a house] to be considered impure when he enters it. 10:12. This does not apply with regard to a zav.

וּמְשַׁלְּחִין זָבִין וְזָבוֹת נִדּוֹת וְיוֹלְדוֹת חוּץ לִשְׁתֵּי מַחֲנוֹת שֶׁהוּא חוּץ לְהַר הַבַּיִת. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מְטַמְּאִין הַמִּשְׁכָּב וְהַמּוֹשָׁב אֲפִלּוּ מִתַּחַת הָאֶבֶן מַה שֶּׁאֵין הַמֵּת מְטַמֵּא:

Men with a zav condition, women with a zavah condition, niddot, and women who gave birth are sent outside two camps, i.e., outside the Temple Mount. [The rationale for this severity is that] they cause an entity upon which they are seated or upon which they are lying to become ritually impure, 1:1. even if it is under a stone. 6:5, 7:1, which explains that even if there is a stone - which itself never contracts ritual impurity - intervening between the person's body and the entity, the entity becomes impure. [This does not apply] with regard to impurity [contracted] from a corpse. 5:14.

טְמֵא מֵת אֲפִלּוּ הַמֵּת עַצְמוֹ מֻתָּר לְהִכָּנֵס לְהַר הַבַּיִת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות יג יט) "וַיִּקַּח משֶׁה אֶת עַצְמוֹת יוֹסֵף עִמּוֹ" עִמּוֹ בְּמַחֲנֵה הַלְּוִיָּה:

A person who is impure because of contact with a human corpse - and even a corpse itself - is permitted to enter the Temple Mount. [This is derived from Exodus 13:19]: "And Moses took the bones of Joseph with him.". Moses brought his body with him from Egypt, transporting it on the entire journey through the desert. "With him" [implies] into the camp of the Levites.

הַחֵיל מְשַׁלְּחִין מִמֶּנּוּ עַכּוּ"ם וּטְמֵאֵי מֵת וּבוֹעֲלֵי נִדּוֹת. אֲבָל טְבוּל יוֹם נִכְנַס לְשָׁם שֶׁכְּבָר טָבַל:

From the chayl, 5:3). gentiles, those who contracted impurity from a human corpse, and those who had relations with a niddah are sent away. 7:16-18. A person who immersed that day may enter there, for he has already immersed.

עֶזְרַת הַנָּשִׁים מְשַׁלְּחִין מִמֶּנּוּ טְבוּל יוֹם אֲבָל לֹא מְחֻסַּר כִּפּוּרִים. שֶׁמְּחֻסַּר כִּפּוּרִים הֶעֱרִיב שִׁמְשׁוֹ. וְאָסוּר טְבוּל יוֹם בְּמַחֲנֵה לְוִיָּה מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים:

From the Women's Courtyard, 5:7-9. one who immersed himself that day is sent away, but not one who has not completed the purification process., a zavah, a woman who gave birth or miscarried, or a convert, who even after immersing themselves in the mikveh, must bring a sacrifice before their purification process is complete. See Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah 1:1. For [the day on which] a person who has not completed the purification process [immersed himself] has already passed. brings proof that one who has not yet completed the purification process is in a different category than a person who has immersed himself from the fact that the former is permitted to partake of terumah, while the latter is not. The prohibition against a person who has immersed himself entering [this portion of] the camp of the Levites is Rabbinic in origin. 32b relates that this restriction was imposed by Yehoshefat, King of Judah.

מֵעֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל וּלְפָנִים אֲפִלּוּ מְחֻסַּר כִּפּוּרִים לֹא יִכָּנֵס לְשָׁם שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא טָהַר טָהֳרָה גְּמוּרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יב ח) "וְכִפֶּר עָלֶיהָ הַכֹּהֵן וְטָהֵרָה" מִכְּלַל שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא גָּמְרָה טָהֳרָתָהּ:

From the Courtyard of the Israelites 5:11). This area begins "the camp of the Shechinah" into which all of those who are impure may not enter according to Scriptural Law. and onward even one who has not completed his process of purification should not enter, because his process of purification is not yet consummated. [This is evident from Leviticus 12:8 which, with regard to a woman who seeks purification after childbirth,] states: "And the priest will bring atonement for her and she will become pure." One can infer that until then, she was not pure.

הַטָּמֵא הַמְשֻׁלָּח מֵהַר הַבַּיִת אִם נִכְנַס עוֹבֵר בְּלֹא תַּעֲשֶׂה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כג יא) "וְיָצָא מִחוּץ לַמַּחֲנֶה" זֶה מַחֲנֵה שְׁכִינָה (דברים כג יא) "וְלֹא יָבֹא אֶל תּוֹךְ הַמַּחֲנֶה" זֶה מַחֲנֵה לְוִיָּה. וְכֵן מְצֹרָע שֶׁנִּכְנַס לִירוּשָׁלַיִם לוֹקֶה. אֲבָל אִם נִכְנַס לִשְׁאָר הֶעָרִים הַמֻּקָּפוֹת חוֹמָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ רַשַּׁאי לְפִי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יג מו) "בָּדָד יֵשֵׁב" אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה:

An impure person who [must be] sent away from the Temple Mount, violates a negative commandment (negative commandment 78) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 565) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. Its violation is punishable by lashes. if he enters there, as [can be inferred from Deuteronomy 23:11 which] states: "And he shall go outside the camp" - this refers to the camp of the Shechinah - "and he shall not enter the midst of the camp" - this refers to the camp of the Levites. notes that the Rambam's interpretation of the verse reverses the order found in Pesachim 68a and the Sifri. He suggests that perhaps the Rambam had a different version of that text. Similarly, a person afflicted by tzara'at who enters Jerusalem is liable for lashes. 19:4 where the Rambam lists those who are punished by lashes, he does not mention this instance. If, however, he enters any of the other walled cities 1:4 and Hilchot Shemitah VeYovel 12:15 which explain that this term applies only to a city surrounded by a wall at the time when Joshua conquered the land. Even if the wall of such a city is destroyed, the city is still placed in that category. Moreover, if a city was not walled at the time of Joshua's conquest, even if it was walled afterwards, it is not placed in this category. [in Eretz Yisrael], although he is not allowed to, 7:13; Hilchot Tuma'at Tzara'at 10:7. Based on Tosafot (Berachot 5b), Rabbi Akiva Eiger states that these restrictions apply only during the era when the Jubilee year was observed. as [implied by the verse]: "He shall abide alone," he is not liable for lashes.

נִכְנַס הַמְצֹרָע לְהַר הַבַּיִת לוֹקֶה שְׁמוֹנִים. אֲבָל טְמֵא מֵת אוֹ טְבוּל יוֹם שֶׁנִּכְנַס לְעֶזְרַת נָשִׁים אוֹ מְחֻסַּר כִּפּוּרִים שֶׁנִּכְנַס לְעֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת:

If one afflicted with tzara'at entered the Temple Mount, he is liable for 80 lashes. 1:8, based on the Tosefta to Keilim), the Rambam states these concepts slightly differently.The Kessef Mishneh adds that if the person afflicted with tzara'at enters the Temple Courtyard, he is liable for an addition set of lashes. If, however, one who is impure because of contact with a human corpse or one who immersed himself that day entered the Women's Courtyard, adds that if the person enters the Temple Courtyard, he is liable for 120 lashes. or one who has not completed his process of purification entered the Israelites' Courtyard, he is not given lashes.. The Kessef Mishneh cites a passage from Zevachim 17b which appears to support the Ra'avad's objection. To resolve the Rambam's ruling, the Kessef Mishneh, however, quotes Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 18:14, where the Rambam distinguishes between an impure person who has immersed and one who has not done so as of yet. He also quotes other opinions in support of the distinction the Rambam makes. He is, however, given stripes for rebellious conduct.

וּכְשֵׁם שֶׁשִּׁלּוּחַ טְמֵאִים מִן הַמִּקְדָּשׁ בַּעֲשֵׂה כָּךְ אִם נִכְנְסוּ עוֹבְרִים בְּלֹא תַּעֲשֶׂה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר ה ג) "וְלֹא יְטַמְּאוּ אֶת מַחֲנֵיהֶם" זֶה מַחֲנֵה שְׁכִינָה:

Just as there is a positive commandment to send impure persons out from the Temple, so too, if they enter, they violate a negative commandment, (negative commandment 77) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 363) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. as [Numbers 5:3] states: "They shall not make your camp impure." This refers to the camp of the Shechinah.

וּמִנַּיִן שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹבֵר אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן נִכְנַס אֲבָל אִם נָגַע בַּעֲזָרָה מֵאֲחוֹרֶיהָ פָּטוּר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בְּיוֹלֶדֶת (ויקרא יב ד) "וְאֶל הַמִּקְדָּשׁ לֹא תָבֹא":

What source teaches that one does not violate the prohibition unless he enters [the Temple], but that he is exempt if he touches the Temple Courtyard from the outside? [Leviticus 12:4] states with regard to a woman who gives birth: "She shall not enter the Sanctuary."

טָמֵא שֶׁנִּכְנַס לַמִּקְדָּשׁ בְּמֵזִיד עָנוּשׁ כָּרֵת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יז טז) "וְאִם לֹא יְכַבֵּס וּבְשָׂרוֹ לֹא יִרְחָץ וְנָשָׂא עֲוֹנוֹ". בְּשׁוֹגֵג מֵבִיא קָרְבָּן עוֹלֶה וְיוֹרֵד שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ה ב) "אוֹ נֶפֶשׁ אֲשֶׁר תִּגַּע בְּכָל דָּבָר טָמֵא". וְאֵין חַיָּבִין כָּרֵת אוֹ קָרְבָּן אֶלָּא מֵעֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל וּלְפָנִים אוֹ עַל תּוֹסֶפֶת הָעֲזָרָה שֶׁנִּתְקַדְּשָׁה קְדֻשָּׁה גְּמוּרָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

When an impure person willfully enters the Temple, he is punishable by karet, 28a) and the soul not meriting a portion in the world to come (Hilchot Teshuvah 8:1). as [Leviticus 17:16] states: "If he will not clean [his garments] or wash his flesh, he will bear his iniquity." explains that the Rambam quotes this verse rather than Numbers 19:13-20 which is more explicit, because the latter passage speaks only about one who became impure due to contact with a human corpse and the prohibition applies even when one became impure for other reasons. [If he enters] unknowingly, he is liable for an adjustable guilt offering, 1:3 and ch. 10, which explains that there are certain transgressions for which the atonement offering required varies according to the transgressor's financial capacity. as [ibid. 5:2] states: "Or a soul that will touch any impure entity." One is liable for karet or a sacrifice only when one enters from the Israelites' Courtyard or onward or into an addition to the Courtyard that was sanctified in a consummate manner, as we explained. 6:10-14 which describes the manner in which additions are made to the Temple Courtyard.

וְאֵי זֶהוּ הַטָּמֵא שֶׁחַיָּב כָּרֵת עַל הַמִּקְדָּשׁ כָּל שֶׁנִּטְמָא בְּטֻמְאָה מִן הַמֵּת שֶׁהַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ עָלֶיהָ שֶׁכְּבָר נִתְפָּרֵשׁ בִּנְזִירוּת. אוֹ שֶׁיִּגַּע בָּאָדָם אוֹ בְּכֵלִים שֶׁנִּטְמְאוּ בְּאוֹתָן הַטֻּמְאוֹת שֶׁהַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ עֲלֵיהֶם שֶׁהֲרֵי הוּא שֵׁנִי לָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁנָּגַע בְּמֵת. אוֹ שֶׁנִּטְמָא בִּשְׁאָר אֲבוֹת הַטֻּמְאוֹת שֶׁל תּוֹרָה שֶׁיִּתְפָּרְשׁוּ בִּמְקוֹמָן:

What are the types of impurity for which one is liable [for entering] the Temple [while impure]?a) Anyone who became impure through contact with a human corpse in a manner which would require a nazirite to shave [his head] because of them; these are explained in [Hilchot] Nizirut; 7:1-6 which describes this subject in detail. As stated in Hilchot Tumat Meit 3:3: "All ritual impurity resulting from a corpse for which a nazirite is not required to shave does not stem from Scriptural Law." Implied is that since a nazirite is forbidden to cut his hair according to Scriptural Law, when he contracts ritual impurity stemming from a human corpse that is only Rabbinic in origin, he should not cut his hair, because then the Rabbinic safeguard would lead to the violation of Scriptural Law. Note also the commentary to Hilchot Nizirut which explains that the Rambam is referring to ritual impurity that is not explicitly mentioned in the Torah, but could be considered of Scriptural origin, because it was derived through the laws of Biblical exegesis.b) one who touched a person or a utensil that became impure through those types of impurity for which a nazirite must shave [his head]; for such a person is considered as a second level of impurity to a primary object of impurity that touched a corpse; 5:4-5).The Ra'avad states however that a nazirite is not obligated to shave his head if he touched a utensil or a person that became impure due to contact with a corpse. Hence, he concludes, one should not be liable for entering the Temple after having contracted impurity in this manner. The Kessef Mishneh maintains that the simple meaning of the passage in Nazir 54a appears to support the Ra'avad's understanding. Nevertheless, he cites a passage from the Jerusalem Talmud (Nazir 7:4) which could be interpreted as supporting the Rambam's ruling.c) one who became impure through contact with another primary source of impurity as mandated by Scriptural Law, as will be explained in their appropriate places..

כְּלָלוֹ שֶׁל דָּבָר כָּל הַטָּעוּן בִּיאַת מַיִם מִן הַתּוֹרָה חַיָּב כָּרֵת עַל בִּיאַת הַמִּקְדָּשׁ וַאֲפִלּוּ אַחַר שֶׁטָּבַל עַד שֶׁיַּעֲרִיב שִׁמְשׁוֹ. אֲבָל הַמִּתְטַמֵּא בְּטֻמְאוֹת מִן הַמֵּת שֶׁאֵין הַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ עֲלֵיהֶן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא טֻמְאַת שִׁבְעָה הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר עַל בִּיאַת הַמִּקְדָּשׁ:

The general principle is: Anyone who is required to immerse himself in water. according to Scriptural Law is liable for karet for entering the Temple [while impure] even after he immersed himself until nightfall [that day]. The Radbaz cites the Rambam's ruling in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 18:14 which would seem to support the Ra'avad's ruling. It states that a person who was ritually impure, then immersed himself, and then partook of sacrificial foods before nightfall is liable for lashes, but is not liable for karet. Nevertheless, the Radbaz explains that a distinction can be made between these two situations. If, however, one became impure due to impurity stemming from a human corpse that does not require a nazirite to shave [his head], he is exempt for entering the Temple, even though his impurity lasts for seven days.

וְכֵן הַנּוֹגֵעַ בְּכֵלִים שֶׁנָּגְעוּ בְּאָדָם שֶׁנָּגַע בְּמֵת אוֹ שֶׁנָּגַע בְּאָדָם שֶׁנָּגַע בְּכֵלִים הַנּוֹגְעִים בְּמֵת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא רִאשׁוֹן לְעִנְיַן תְּרוּמָה וּלְטַמֵּא בְּשַׂר קָדָשִׁים הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר עַל בִּיאַת הַמִּקְדָּשׁ. שֶׁדְּבָרִים אֵלּוּ הֲלָכָה מִפִּי הַקַּבָּלָה. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא פָּטוּר מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת:

Similarly, if one touches utensils that touched a human corpse or touches a person who is touching utensils that touch a corpse, even though he is considered as impure to the first degree with regard to terumah 5:4, the Rambam describes the impurity caused by such situations. and with regard to imparting impurity to sacrificial foods, he is exempt for entering the Temple. For these matters are laws received through the Oral Tradition.:5, the Rambam continues: "Even though according to the Oral Tradition [one is rendered impure for such matters], this is not Scriptural Law. For it is not explicitly stated in the Torah that one who becomes impure through contact with a human corpse becomes a source of impurity and one who touches him becomes impure to the first degree." In this instance, however, the Rambam is probably following his renown approach that any concept that is not explicitly stated in the Torah is considered as "from the Oral Tradition" even though it was also conveyed to Moses at Sinai. Although he is exempt, he is given stripes for rebellious conduct.

הַמַּכְנִיס שֶׁרֶץ וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ אוֹ שֶׁהִכְנִיס אָדָם טָמֵא לַמִּקְדָּשׁ הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב כָּרֵת שֶׁהֲרֵי טִמֵּא מִקְדַּשׁ ה'. אֲבָל הַזּוֹרֵק כֵּלִים טְמֵאִים לַמִּקְדָּשׁ אֲפִלּוּ הָיוּ כֵּלִים שֶׁנָּגְעוּ בְּמֵת פָּטוּר מִן הַכָּרֵת. אֲבָל חַיָּב מַלְקוֹת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יז טז) "וְאִם לֹא יְכַבֵּס" וְגוֹ' מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ עַל רְחִיצַת גּוּפוֹ עָנוּשׁ כָּרֵת וְעַל כִּבּוּס בְּגָדָיו לוֹקֶה אַרְבָּעִים:

A person who brings a dead teeming animal 4:1, a dead teeming animal imparts ritual impurity only when one touches it and not when one carries it. For if the person had touched it, he would become impure and be liable for karet entering the Temple in that state. or the like into the Temple or when he brings an impure person into the Temple, he is liable for karet, because he made God's sanctuary impure. If, however, he threw impure utensils into the Temple - even if they were utensils that touched a corpse - he is exempt from karet, but liable for lashes, as [implied by the prooftext cited above]: "If he will not clean [his garments]...." According to the Oral Tradition, [for entering the Temple without] washing his body, he is liable for karet. [For entering without] cleaning his garments, he receives 40 lashes.

יֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה אֶלָּא עַל בְּגָדִים שֶׁהֵן אַב טֻמְאָה. כְּגוֹן בְּגָדִים שֶׁנָּגַע בָּהֶן זֶה הַטָּמֵא לְמֵת שֶׁהֵן אַב הַטֻּמְאָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר. אֲבָל בֶּגֶד שֶׁהוּא רִאשׁוֹן אִם הִכְנִיסוֹ לַמִּקְדָּשׁ אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה עָלָיו אֲבָל מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת:

It appears to me that he is liable for lashes only for his clothes that are a source of ritual impurity, i.e., clothes that were touched by a person who became impure through contact with a corpse that themselves become a source for ritual impurity, as will be explained. 5:2. There the Rambam states that if a person touching the corpse touches any other utensil at the same time, that utensil is considered as if it touched the corpse itself. If, by contrast, one brings a garment which is of first degree impurity into the Temple, he is not liable for lashes.. The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and maintains that even bringing an object that is not a source for ritual impurity into the Temple causes one to be liable for lashes. The Kessef Mishneh supports the Rambam's view, explaining that there is a logical basis for his conclusion. Since the Torah was lenient with regard to utensils (and garments), absolving one from karet even when the utensil was a source of impurity, we can conclude that leniency would also be shown with regard to lashes. He does, however, receive stripes for rebellious conduct.

וְכֵן טָמֵא שֶׁהִכְנִיס יָדוֹ לַמִּקְדָּשׁ מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת. וְכֵן כָּל טָמֵא בְּאָב מֵאֲבוֹת הַטֻּמְאוֹת שֶׁל דִּבְרֵיהֶם אוֹ שֶׁאָכַל אֳכָלִין טְמֵאִים וְשָׁתָה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין וְנִכְנַס לַמִּקְדָּשׁ בְּמֵזִיד קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּטְבּל מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת:

Similarly, when an impure person inserts his hand [alone] into the Temple, supports the Rambam's ruling. he is given stripes for rebellious conduct. Similarly, anyone who purposely enters the Temple before immersing himself 9:1. while he is impure because of contact with objects that are sources of ritual impurity by virtue of Rabbinic decree, because he ate impure foods, or because he drank impure beverages is given stripes for rebellious conduct.

טָמֵא שֶׁנִּכְנַס לַמִּקְדָּשׁ דֶּרֶךְ גַּגּוֹת פָּטוּר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יב ד) "וְאֶל הַמִּקְדָּשׁ לֹא תָבֹא" דֶּרֶךְ בִּיאָה חִיְּבָה תּוֹרָה. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא פָּטוּר מִכָּרֵת מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת [וַאֲפִלּוּ נִכְנַס בְּמִגְדָּל הַפּוֹרֵחַ בַּאֲוִיר] בֵּין שֶׁנִּכְנַס לַמִּקְדָּשׁ [בְּמִגְדָּל] דֶּרֶךְ גַּגּוֹת. בֵּין שֶׁנִּכְנַס בּוֹ דֶּרֶךְ פְּתָחִים:

When an impure person enters the Temple through the rooftops, he is exempt.). [This is derived from the prooftext cited above:] "He shall not enter the Temple." [Implied is that] the Torah held him liable [only when he entered in] the way one usually enters. emphasizes that if he remains in the Temple for the amount of time for which he is liable (see Halachah 22), he is liable for karet even if he entered through the rooftops. Although he is exempt for karet, he is given stripes for rebellious conduct.[This exemption applies] even if he enters in a compartment flying in the air, whether he entered the Temple in this compartment through the roofs or through the entrances.

כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁחַיָּבִים עַל זְדוֹנוֹ כָּרֵת וְעַל שִׁגְגָתוֹ קָרְבָּן. אִם נִמְצֵאת שָׁם טֻמְאָה בְּשַׁבָּת מוֹצִיאִין אוֹתָהּ. וּשְׁאָר הַמְּקוֹמוֹת כּוֹפִין עָלָיו כְּלִי עַד אַחַר שַׁבָּת. וּכְשֶׁהֵן מוֹצִיאִין אֵין מוֹצִיאִין אוֹתָהּ אֶלָּא בִּפְשׁוּטֵי כְּלֵי עֵץ שֶׁאֵין מְקַבֵּל טֻמְאָה שֶׁלֹּא לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַטֻּמְאָה:

In all places where one is liable for karet for a willful transgression or a sacrifice for an unknowing transgression, should an impure object be found there on the Sabbath, it should be removed. and there is a Rabbinic prohibition against transporting it on the Sabbath. Nevertheless, Rabbinic prohibitions of this nature are not applied in the Temple (Rashi, Eruvin 104b). In other places, it should be covered with a utensil until after the Sabbath. When it is removed, it should be removed only with flat wooden utensils which do not contract ritual impurity, 1:10. See also Hilchot Temidim UMusafim 3:6. so that there should not be an increase in ritual impurity.).

אֶחָד טָמֵא שֶׁנִּכְנַס לַמִּקְדָּשׁ טָהוֹר. אוֹ טָהוֹר שֶׁנִּכְנַס לַמִּקְדָּשׁ שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ טֻמְאָה. כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָיָה מֵת תַּחַת אֹהֶל בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ וְנִכְנַס הוּא תַּחַת הָאֹהֶל. הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב כָּרֵת שֶׁהֲרֵי בִּיאָתוֹ וְטֻמְאָה בָּאִין כְּאַחַת. נִכְנַס לַמִּקְדָּשׁ וְנִטְמָא שָׁם אַחַר שֶׁנִּכְנַס אֲפִלּוּ טִמֵּא עַצְמוֹ שָׁם בְּמֵזִיד יְמַהֵר וְיִבָּהֵל וְיֵצֵא בְּדֶרֶךְ קְצָרָה:

Both an impure person who entered the Temple when it was pure and a pure person who entered the Temple when there was impurity within it - e.g., a corpse was lying under a shelter in the Temple and he entered under that shelter - are liable for karet. [In the latter situation,] his entrance and his impurity occur at one time.If one enters the Temple and becomes impure there after he enters, even if he purposely made himself impure, 17a. Hence, the Rambam rules leniently (Kessef Mishneh). he should hurry, and depart in the shortest way possible..

וְאָסוּר לוֹ לִשְׁהוֹת אוֹ לְהִשְׁתַּחֲווֹת אוֹ לָצֵאת בְּדֶרֶךְ אֲרֻכָּה. וְאִם שָׁהָה אוֹ שֶׁיָּצָא בַּאֲרֻכָּה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא שָׁהָה אוֹ שֶׁהֶחְזִיר פָּנָיו לַהֵיכָל וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא שָׁהָה חַיָּב כָּרֵת. וְאִם הָיָה שׁוֹגֵג מֵבִיא קָרְבָּן:

It is forbidden for him to tarry, to bow, or to depart via a longer way. If he tarried or departed via a longer way even though he did not tarry, or he turned his face to the Sanctuary and bowed even if he did not tarry, he is liable for karet. If he acted unknowingly, he must bring a sacrifice.

לֹא הֶחֱזִיר פָּנָיו אֶלָּא הִשְׁתַּחֲוָה דֶּרֶךְ יְצִיאָתוֹ כְּלַפֵּי חוּץ אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן שָׁהָה כְּשִׁעוּר. וְכַמָּה שִׁעוּר שְׁהִיָּתוֹ כְּדֵי לִקְרוֹת (דברי הימים ב ז ג) "וְיִכְרְעוּ אַפָּיִם אַרְצָה עַל הָרִצְפָּה וְיִשְׁתַּחֲווּ וְהוֹדוֹת לַה' כִּי טוֹב כִּי לְעוֹלָם חַסְדּוֹ". וְזֶהוּ שִׁעוּר הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה:

If he did not turn his face [toward the Sanctuary], but bowed as he was departing toward the outside area, he is not liable unless he tarrys.How long a delay [creates a liability]? Enough time to read the verse: 16b which quotes the description of the people's bowing in II Chronicles 7:3. "And they bowed with their faces to the ground on the floor, prostrating themselves and giving thanks to God who is good and whose kindness is everlasting." This is the measure of the delay [for which one is liable].

וְאֵי זוֹ הִיא דֶּרֶךְ אֲרֻכָּה. כָּל שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר לוֹ לָצֵאת מִן הַמִּקְדָּשׁ בְּדֶרֶךְ קְצָרָה מִמֶּנָּה. יָצָא בִּקְצָרָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא רָץ אֶלָּא הָלַךְ עָקֵב בְּצַד גּוּדָל אֲפִלּוּ כָּל הַיּוֹם פָּטוּר. יָצָא בַּאֲרֻכָּה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁרָץ וְדָחַק עַצְמוֹ בְּכָל כֹּחוֹ וְנִמְצָא שִׁעוּר זְמַן שֶׁהָלַךְ בּוֹ הָאֲרֻכָּה פָּחוֹת מִשִּׁעוּר הַזְּמַן שֶׁמְּהַלֵּךְ כָּל אָדָם בִּקְצָרָה הוֹאִיל וְיָצָא בַּאֲרֻכָּה חַיָּב. יָצָא בִּקְצָרָה וְהָלַךְ מְעַט וְעָמַד וְשָׁהָה מְעַט עַד שֶׁנִּצְטָרֵף מִכָּל הַשְּׁהִיּוֹת כְּדֵי הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה בְּמֵזִיד אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה בְּשׁוֹגֵג אֵינוֹ מֵבִיא קָרְבָּן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַדָּבָר סָפֵק. אֲבָל מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת:

What is meant by [departing] via longer way? Any way for which it is possible to depart from the Temple via a shorter way.If one departed via a shorter way, even if he did not run, but instead walked [slowly], positioning his heel by his toes, although it takes the entire day, he is exempt. If he took a longer path, even though he ran and pressed himself with all of his power and thus the amount of time it took for him to leave in this manner was less than it would take other men via the shorter way, he is liable, because he departed via the longer path.If he departed via the shorter path, but walked some, then stood, tarried some, [and continued this pattern] until all of his delays together amount to the time it takes to bow, he is not liable for lashes if he acted willfully, nor is he liable for a sacrifice if he acted unknowingly, because there is an unresolved question concerning the matter. 17a. Hence we rule leniently. He is, however, given stripes for rebellious conduct. 16:3, 18:5, and notes for a definition of this punishment and the situations where it is applied.