God stated: I have placed the likeness of My image [deyokan] within humans, as they were created in My image, and owing to their sins I have overturned it, as when this person died the Divine image in him was removed. Therefore, you must also overturn your beds on account of this. The Gemara asks: What is the halakha governing one who was ostracized or a leper, with regard to overturning the bed? The Gemara has no answer, and the question shall stand unresolved.

§ The Gemara proceeds to the next topic: A mourner is prohibited from performing work, as it is written: “And I will turn your Festivals into mourning” (Amos 8:10). The Gemara infers: Just as a Festival is a time when it is prohibited to work, so too, a mourner is prohibited from performing work.

The Gemara asks: What is the halakha concerning one who was ostracized with regard to the performance of work? Rav Yosef said: Come and hear that which is taught in the following baraita: When the Sages said that the performance of work is prohibited on a communal fast due to lack of rain, they meant only that work is prohibited during the day of the fast, but during the night of the fast it is permitted. And you find a similar halakha with regard to a person who was ostracized and with regard to a mourner. What, is it not with regard to all of the prohibitions stated that the baraita says that they apply to one who was ostracized as well, including the prohibition to engage in work? The Gemara rejects this argument: No, this is referring to the rest of the prohibitions, but not to work.

The Gemara offers a different proof: Come and hear that which was taught in the following baraita: One who is ostracized may teach Torah to others, and others may teach him Torah. Similarly, he may be hired for work by others, and others may be hired by him. The Gemara concludes: Learn from here that it is permitted for one who is ostracized to engage in work. The Gemara asks: What is the halakha concerning a leper, with regard to the performance of work? An answer is not found, and the question shall stand unresolved.

§ The Gemara discusses a different prohibition: A mourner is prohibited from bathing, as it is written: “And do not anoint yourself with oil, but be as a woman that had for a long time mourned for the dead” (II Samuel 14:2). And bathing is included in the category of anointing, as both activities have a similar goal, i.e., cleanliness.

The Gemara asks: What is the halakha concerning one who is ostracized with regard to bathing? Rav Yosef said: Come and hear that which was taught in the following baraita: When the Sages said that bathing is prohibited on a communal fast, they meant only that a person may not wash his entire body, but washing his face, his hands, and his feet is permitted. And you find a similar halakha with regard to a person who was ostracized and with regard to a mourner. What, is it not with regard to all the prohibitions stated in the baraita, including the prohibition against bathing, that they apply also to one who is ostracized? The Gemara rejects this argument: No, this is referring to the rest of the prohibitions, but not to bathing. The Gemara asks: What is the halakha concerning a leper with regard to bathing? An answer is not found, and the question shall stand unresolved.

§ The Gemara moves to the next topic: A mourner is prohibited from wearing shoes. Since the Merciful One says to Ezekiel with regard to how his mourning rites should differ from the accepted custom: “And put your shoes upon your feet” (Ezekiel 24:17), which shows by inference that everyone else, i.e., all other mourners, is prohibited from wearing shoes.

The Gemara asks: What is the halakha concerning one who is ostracized with regard to wearing shoes? Rav Yosef said: Come and hear that which is taught in the following baraita: When the Sages said that wearing shoes is prohibited on a communal fast, they meant only that one may not wear shoes when he is walking about in the city, but if he set out to travel on the road, wearing shoes is permitted. How so? When he sets out on the road, he may put on his shoes. But as soon as he enters the city once again, he must take off his shoes and continue barefoot. And you find a similar halakha with regard to a person who was ostracized and with regard to a mourner. What, is it not with regard to all of the prohibitions stated in the baraita, including the prohibition against wearing shoes, that they apply also to one who was ostracized? The Gemara rejects this argument: No, this is referring to the rest of the prohibitions, but not to wearing shoes.

The Gemara asks: What is the halakha concerning a leper with regard to wearing shoes? No answer is found, and the question shall stand unresolved.

§ The Gemara considers another issue: A mourner is prohibited from engaging in sexual relations, as it is written: “And David comforted Bath-Sheba his wife, and went into her, and lay with her” (II Samuel 12:24), after their son had died. This proves by inference that initially, during the period of mourning, sexual relations were forbidden.

The Gemara asks: What is the halakha concerning one who is ostracized with regard to sexual relations? Rav Yosef said: Come and hear that which is taught in a baraita: All those years that the Jewish people were in the wilderness they were ostracized, and yet they engaged in sexual relations, as there were children born to them during that period. It follows that it is permitted for one who is ostracized to engage in sexual relations. Abaye said to him: Perhaps one who is ostracized by Heaven is different, as that is less serious than being ostracized by an earthly court.

The Gemara asks in astonishment: Is it less serious? But didn’t you, Abaye, say elsewhere that a decree of ostracism imposed by Heaven is more serious than one issued by an earthly court? For this reason, Abaye rejected several proofs of Rav Yosef from the previously cited baraita. The Gemara answers: Abaye is uncertain whether a decree of ostracism imposed by Heaven is more or less serious than one imposed by an earthly court. Therefore, when he goes in this direction he rejects the argument, and when he goes in that direction he rejects the argument. Abaye asserts that since the issue is in doubt, no proof can be derived from ostracism issued by Heaven.

The Gemara continues: What is the halakha concerning a leper with regard to sexual relations? Come and hear a proof, as it is taught in a baraita: The verse concerning a leper states: “But he shall remain outside his tent seven days” (Leviticus 14:8), from which it is derived that a leper should be like one who is ostracized and like a mourner, and he is prohibited from engaging in sexual relations. How is this derived? The only meaning of the term “his tent” is his wife, as is stated after the giving of the Torah: “Go say to them, return again to your tents” (Deuteronomy 5:27). This statement rendered it permitted for the men to once again engage in sexual relations with their wives after they had previously been prohibited to do so in anticipation of the giving of the Torah, as expressed in the verse: “Come not near a woman” (Exodus 19:15). The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from this that it is prohibited for a leper to engage in sexual relations.

The Gemara asks: If this is the case, then can we also resolve the question raised above with regard to one who is ostracized, by saying that it is prohibited for such a person to engage in sexual relations? Rav Huna, son of Rav Pineḥas, said in the name of Rav Yosef: Is it taught that a leper is prohibited from engaging in sexual relations like one who is ostracized? It states only that he should be treated like one who is ostracized and like a mourner, i.e., he should be like them with regard to other things, and in addition he is prohibited from engaging in sexual relations. Therefore, no proof can be derived from here with regard to one who is ostracized that he, too, is prohibited from engaging in sexual relations.

§ The Gemara continues: A mourner may not send his offerings to the Temple, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Shimon says: A peace-offering [shelamim] is given this name also to teach us that one may sacrifice it only at a time when he is whole [shalem] and his mind is settled, but not at a time when he is an acute mourner, i.e., on the first day of his bereavement, when he is distressed.

The Gemara asks: What is the halakha concerning one who is ostracized with regard to sending his offerings to the Temple? Rav Yosef said: Come and hear a proof from that which is taught in a baraita: All those years that the Jewish people were in the wilderness they were ostracized, and yet they sent their offerings. Abaye said to him: Perhaps one who is ostracized by Heaven is different, as that is less serious than being ostracized by an earthly court.

The Gemara asks in astonishment: Is it less serious? But certainly you, Abaye, said elsewhere that being ostracized by Heaven is more serious than being ostracized by an earthly court. The Gemara offers a resolution: Abaye is uncertain whether being ostracized by Heaven is more or less serious than being ostracized by an earthly court, and therefore he rejects Rav Yosef’s arguments in both directions.

The Gemara asks: What is the halakha with regard to a leper sending his offerings to the Temple? The Gemara answers: Come and hear a proof, as it is taught in a baraita with regard to a priest who became ritually impure: “And after he is purified, they shall count for him seven days” (Ezekiel 44:26). The verse should be understood as follows: “And after he is purified”; after he has separated from his deceased relative. “They shall count for him seven days”; these are the seven days of his counting before he may purify himself. “And on the day that he goes into the Sanctuary, into the inner court, to minister in the Sanctuary, he shall sacrifice his sin-offering, says the Lord God” (Ezekiel 44:27);