Tumah and taharah


In Jewish law, ṭumah and ṭaharah are the state of being ritually "impure" and "pure", respectively. The Hebrew noun ṭum'ah, meaning "impurity", describes a state of ritual impurity. A person or object which contracts ṭumah is said to be ṭamé, and thereby unsuited for certain holy activities and uses until undergoing predefined purification actions that usually include the elapse of a specified time-period.
The contrasting Hebrew noun ṭaharah describes a state of ritual purity that qualifies the ṭahor to be used for kedushah. The most common method of achieving ṭaharah is by the person or object being immersed in a mikveh. This concept is connected with ritual washing in Judaism, and both ritually impure and ritually pure states have parallels in ritual purification in other world religions.
The laws of ṭumah and ṭaharah were generally followed by the Israelites, particularly during the First and Second Temple Period, and to a limited extent are a part of applicable halakha in modern times.

Etymology

The Hebrew noun ṭum'ah derives from the verb ṭamé, in the qal form of the verb "to become impure"; in the niphal to "defile oneself"; and in the transitive Piel to defile something or pronounce something impure. The verb stem has a corresponding adjective, ṭamé, "impure".
Likewise the Hebrew noun ṭahara is also derived from a verb, in this case ṭaher "to be ritually pure". and in the transitive piel "to purify". The verb and noun have a corresponding adjective, ṭahor, "ritually pure". The word is a cognate to the Arabic word 'طهارة' ṭahāra which has the same meaning in Islam.
Some sources, such as Samson Raphael Hirsch on Genesis 7:2, claim that the meaning is "entombed", meaning the person or item that is in the tame state is blocked, and not in a state of receiving holy transmission. Ṭahor, by contrast, is defined as "pure" in the sense that the person or object is in a clear state and can/may potentially serve as a conduit for Divine and Godly manifestation. Although ṭumah and ṭaharah is sometimes translated as unclean and clean, it is more a spiritual state than a physical one. Once initiated it is generally immeasurable and unquantifiable by known mechanical detection methods, there is no measure of filth, unsanitary, or odorous affiliation with the state of ṭumah, nor any mechanically measurable level of cleanliness, clarity, or physical purity for the state of ṭaharah.

In the Bible

Usage

The noun form of ṭumah is used around 40 times in the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible is generally translated as "uncleanness" in English language Bibles such as the KJV, and JPS Tanakh. The majority of uses are in Leviticus. Though uses for national impurity occur in Ezra and Ezekiel, and Zechariah prophesies the removal of the "prophets and spirit of impurity from the land". The adjective tamei "impure", is much more common.
The verb form of ṭaharah, the verb ṭaher "be pure", is used first in the Hebrew Bible is in, where Jacob tells his family to "put away strange gods, and be pure".
In general, the term tumah is used in two distinct ways in the Hebrew Bible:
In general, tumah in the sense of "ritual impurity" is prefixed by the letter lamed or lacks any prefix at all, while tumah in the sense of "moral impurity" is prefixed by the letter bet.

Ritual impurity

Activities which create impurity

The Torah, particularly the book of Leviticus, lists various activities which create an "impure" status:
Some of these activities are forbidden, others are permitted, and others are unavoidable. Thus, there is no automatic moral stigma to becoming "impure".

Implications of impure status

Certain activities are prohibited as a result of acquiring this "impure" status. For example:
Just as it is a severe offense to bring impurity into the Israelite sanctuary, "impurity" is also seen as a means of nullifying a worship site of other religions; though the rules for this impurity are not made clear.

Becoming pure again

Different forms of impurity requires various rituals in order to regain a "pure" status. For example:
The term tumah is also used to refer to certain sins, for which there is no specific ritual to remove the impure status. For example:
In a number of cases, no specific sin is mentioned; overall sinful behavior has led to impurity.

In Ezra–Nehemiah

argues that moral impurity is the reason for the gentile expulsion and alienation that occurs in Ezra–Nehemiah. However, S.M. Olyan argues that Ezra and Nehemiah's attempt of the restoration of Israel to its original state was expressed through the expulsion and alienation of foreign peoples that was caused by both ritual and moral impurities. The Judean people believed that Israel and the priestly bloodline of Israel in itself was pure, being the chosen nation of their God. Furthermore, when the men of Israel committed to relations with Gentile people the acts took away from their purity. Olyan argues that there were different actions that were categorized by the Judean people as ritual impurity and moral impurity. Moral impurity can simply be removed, as in physical removal or separation between groups; thus expulsion of the Gentiles from the Judean environment was enough to re-purify the environment. However, ritual impurity is much more serious. Olyan argues that ritual impurity is deeply embedded into covenants, thus a religious ritual must be performed to rid the impurity from the people group.

In rabbinic literature

The Mishnah devotes one of its six sub-divisions, named Tohorot, to the laws of ritual impurity.
Neither the Babylonian nor the Jerusalem Talmud contains systematic commentaries to the tractates of Tohorot, as these laws had little practical relevance after the destruction of the Temple. However, the laws are discussed many times in other tractates, and in later rabbinic literature.
Maimonides clarifies that, in addition to all of Israel, the priests are expected to be knowledgeable and fluent in the general and specifics of ṭumah and ṭaharah law. Given his role of Temple service and year round consumption of terumah, each priest was required to be in a ṭahor state.

Mandatory or optional

The mainstream view among rishonim and non-Kabbalistic authorities is that one is permitted to become tamei, and thus there is no obligation to attempt to remain tahor. As an example, it is not only permitted but a mitzvah to tend to a dead person, even though this causes impurity.
in northern Ethiopia, 1976.
However, some rabbis have advocated keeping some of the laws of purity even in the absence of the temple in Jerusalem and even in the diaspora.
One category that was commonly kept in Talmudic and pre-Talmudic times is ṭumath ochlin v'mashkin. Sages such as Rabban Gamaliel and Hiyya the Great encouraged eating only pure food at all times. Targum Yonathan considered this to be implicit in. One who kept this stringency was called a porush, meaning "separated".
This was also one of the criteria for being a haver, and according to some, the main criterion.
Additionally, some rabbis advocated abstaining from the midras of a niddah. Rabbi Menachem Schneerson discouraged abstaining from any object made impure by a menstruating woman in modern times, with the exception for unique individuals.

Hierarchy of impurity

The rabbis describe a hierarchy of levels of impurity. In general, each level can result from touch by the level above it. The levels are:
The rabbis declared Torah scrolls to be impure by rabbinic law. This seemingly strange law had a practical purpose: it discouraged Jews from storing their terumah produce alongside Torah scrolls, which attracted mice and caused the Torah scrolls to be nibbled on as well.

In modern times

Following the destruction of the Second Temple, ritual impurity status ceased to have practical consequences, with the exception of niddah and zav/zavah. These rules are still practiced in Orthodox Judaism.
In Conservative Judaism, while the concept of niddah and a prohibition on sexual relations during the niddah period are still agreed upon, recent decisions by the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards have endorsed multiple views about the concept of zavah, as well as the tumah status of a niddah. The liberal view held that the concepts of ṭumah and ṭaharah are not relevant outside the context of a Holy Temple, found the concept of zavah no longer applicable, and permitted spouses to touch each other in a manner similar to siblings during the niddah period. The traditional view retained the applicability of the concepts of tumah, ṭaharah, and zavah, and retained a prohibition on all contact.