Flesh that healed is not a sign of impurity unless it is in the baheret itself.
What is implied? In the midst of a baheret, there was a boil, burnt flesh, or a healed boil or burnt flesh, or a bohak and there was totally healthy flesh in the midst of these abnormal skin features. Even though the healthy flesh is in the midst of the baheret, it is not a sign of impurity, because it is within the boil, the burnt flesh, the bohak, or their healed flesh. Similarly, if a boil or its healed flesh, burnt flesh or its healed flesh, or a bohak surrounds the healthy flesh, or one of these abnormal skin features is directly next to the healthy flesh at its side, or one of these abnormal skin features divides the healthy flesh and enters within it, it is not a sign of impurity. This is like a baheret that does not have any sign of impurity and the person should be isolated.
If the boil, the burnt flesh, or the bohak in which the healthy flesh was found, that was at its side, that surrounded it, or that entered it disappeared and thus the healthy flesh alone was found within the baheret at the end of the first week or at the end of the second week, the person should be deemed definitively impure. If they did not depart, he should be released from the process of inspection.