Chapter 13 - Text Notes
27 These diseases have long been incorrectly
identified with leprosy due to a misleading translation in the
Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Bible. According to many
commentators,as well as Tosefta Nego'im 6:1, the disease was actually
of supernatural origin, and it is thus no wonder that it cannot be
exactly identified with any modern malady.
28 As described in
Mishnah Nego'im 1:1: The colors of the signs of skin-eruptions are two
which are really four. The spot of bright spot, white like snow; second
to it is the sign as white as the whitewash [used in] the Temple. The
off-white spot is as white as the skin of an egg; second to it is the
sign as white as [the] wool [of a day-old lamb just washed]---so R.
Meir, but the Sages say: the off-white spot is as white as white wool
and second to it is the sign as white as the skin of an egg. According
to the Sages, then, the order of signs in order of whiteness is: skin
of an egg, white wool, Temple-whitewash, and the whitest is snow.
29
Iyyov 37, 21.
30 Sifra Nego'im, par. 1, 9.
31 As opposed to a case in which it turned white before the
skin-disease erupted, in which case the white hair is not a mark of
impurity (G.A.).
32 The word {Hebrew Ref} refers to "hair"
as a collective noun,while {Hebrew Ref} refers to an individual
hair. Here the first word is used, and so, even though the accompanying
verb is singular,the question naturally arises: How many hairs must
turn white to constitute a sign of impurity? One, or all, or something
in between? (G.A.) Malbim notes that if the verse had wished to specify
one hair, it would have used the word {Hebrew Ref} ; since it did
not, two are intended. It may be wondered why all the hair in
the skin-mark need not turn white; G.A. notes that the appearance of
two hairs are halachically significant in a number of other cases, as
in indicating puberty.
33 Otherwise, why did the verse not merely
state "He is unclean;" why the more awkward "declare him to be
unclean"?(G.A.).
34 Unlike other cases of impurity, which do not
have to be so declared.
35 Since, as Rashi notes in his comments to verse 3, a white mark
will always appear "deeper" than a dark background. The Ramban
explains that, since the hair has not turned white,the skin-eruption's
whiteness is dimmed by the black hair within it, and so does not seem
so deep. Many commentators wonder why Rashi seems to have rejected this
simple explanation; D.D.suggests that Rashi here intends to point out
that this interpretation is not found in the Talmud or Sifra, and is
therefore not altogether authoritative. His confession of ignorance is
thus a rejection of this explanation.
36 The kohein.
37 The
man afflicted.
38 But not outside the camp, to which he is expelled
only after being declared unclean by the kohein (G.A.).
39 By
the kohein for another examination.
40 This latter comment
refers to the next part of the verse,"the skin-eruption did not spread
in the skin."
41 Only if the mark did not spread, but remained as
it was,is he confined for a second week.
42 Since the verse specificies that he becomes pure only if the
eruption dims, other possibilities result in impurity.
43 L.B.
suggests that Rashi intends by this comment to explain why this verse
changes gender from hu' ("it" in masculine gender) to feminine
hi'; the reason is that the reference is not to {Hebrew Ref} ,
"eruption," which is masculine, but {Hebrew Ref} , which is
a feminine noun.
44 Even though this confinement was a result of a
doubtful state, and he was not definitely unclean.
45 Literally,
"called."
46 And no longer in a doubtful intermediate state.
47 As described in the purification ritual of chapter 14.
48 That is, this {Hebrew Ref} , which ordinarily is not
unclean, as Rashi noted in his comments on verse 6, has in this case
become a {Hebrew Ref} , an eruption which is ritually unclean.
49
And therefore the word tzora'as takes the feminine demonstrative
"she [is]." Thus, the alternation of {Hebrew Ref} , "he," and {Hebrew Ref} , "she," are not inconsistent; one refers to tzora'as
and the other to {Hebrew Ref} (M.).
50 I.e., the color.
51 Literally, "or."
52 See the Mishnah quoted above in n. 28
for the secondary types of skin-disease. This rule applies to all
eruptions because of the seemingly unnecessary mention of the general
tzora'as at the opening of verse 9, which refers to "an
eruption of tzora'as" in general, even though the rest of the
section only describes one type (L.B.).
53 This comment does not appear in the first printing of Rashi's
commentary.
54 And not "the eruption," which is the subject of
the sentence (M.).
55 Literally, "to the sight of the kohein
's eyes."
56 Literally, "whose light has darkened." This
halochoh is derived from the seemingly unnecessary mention of the
kohein's eyes; Sifra Nego'im, per. 4, 4.
57 In verse 11.
58 That is, as stipulated in verse 12, the
eruption must be seen by the kohein in its entirety in order to
be declared unclean; if this is not possible because of the slope of
the limb upon whose skin the eruption appears, the eruption cannot be
declared unclean and is therefore clean; see Mishnah Nego'im
6:7,Kiddushin 25a.
59 And therefore fatter and thus broader. Once
the limb becomes filled out, the eruption can be seen from all sides.
60 Sifra Nego'im, per. 5, 1.
61 Which seems unnecessary; when
the word can can be expressed with the letter {Hebrew Ref} ; why
then does the verse employ a longer form ( {Hebrew Ref} , "and
on the day"), when {Hebrew Ref} alone would be sufficient?
62 Literally, "they give him."
63 The week of sheva
berochos after the wedding. The bridegroom is "given" these days
so that he need not worry about being declared unclean or being
confined or quarantined during his wedding feast.
64 All of which
may be subject to some sort of tzora'as, as explained in the
following sections.
65 I.e., Pesach, Shevuos and Sukkos.
66
Literally, "they give him."
67 Mishnah Nego'im 3, 2; [Gemoro]
Moed Koton 7b. A kohein does not examine eruption during
festivals, and so not only the bridgegroom, but everyone is free of
that worry during these times of the year.
68 "It" refers to the flesh and not the tzora'as; see
below.
69 And therefore takes the masculine demonstrative {Hebrew Ref} , "he." The word tzora'as is feminine and would take a
feminine {Hebrew Ref} .
70 Chullin 8a.
71 Rashi wishes to
emphasize that it is the inflammation that has healed, but not
the flesh, since the verse stipulates that the inflammation has been
replaced with another eruption (G.A.).
72 Rashi here substitutes
the phrase "skin eruption" for the verse's "snow-white spot" to
emphasize that this rule applies to all four types of skin eruptions
(M.L.).
73 See verse 3.
74 Once again, Rashi notes the use of a
feminine demonstrative, thus referring not to the nega', the
skin eruption, which is masculine, but to the two specific types of
eruptions which he enumerates (B.Y.).
75 Literally, "beneath it,"
which can also mean "in its place," as Rashi explains.
76 Yechezkel 21, 3.
77 "To contract."
78 Meaning
"contraction."
79 Into two separate parshiyos?
80 To
make up the mininum size for impurity, which is a gris,a
half-bean size.
81 Which is the minimum size of an eruption;
Chullin 8a.
82 Literally, "this." That is, the sign of impurity for eruptions
in fleshy parts of the body is a white hair.
83 Literally,
"this."
84 Again, "hair" here refers to the minimum of two individual
hairs, and the hair must change to yellow from another color
("black"), just as in other cases of skin eruption. This is derived
from the juxtaposition of {Hebrew Ref} , "skin eruption" and
nesek (by means of a {Hebrew Ref} , the juxtaposition of
terms), which indicates that the rule applying to one applies to the
other (L.B.).
85 Verse 37 below.
86 Mishnah Nego'im 10, 5; Sifra Nego'im, per. 9, 7.
87 The
phrase "certainly spreads" is {Hebrew Ref} in Hebrew;
the combination of the two forms of the root p-s-h expresses an
intense form of action; thus, even if the spreading takes place during
the first or second week, the afflicted person is unclean.
88 This seemingly extraneous "and" implies that there are colors
which are signs of purity even though they are not black.
89 This
phrase is very unlike Rashi's usual style; moreover,the word {Hebrew Ref} , "expression" appears in the first printing as {Hebrew Ref}
"for what." It is likely that Rashi's comment was: And what does
tzohov resemble? The appearance of gold.
90 Pale gold.
91 Since
the verse requires that the afflicted person be clean as well as
being declared clean, we should not think that it all depends on
the kohein, even if he is mistaken (G.A.).
92 The Hebrew
word {Hebrew Ref} means a "white spot," but its shape is not
altogether clear from the word {Hebrew Ref} and thus Rashi
explains it.
93 The last line in not in the first printing of Rashi's
commentary; Y.H. suggests that it was added later.
94 That is, like
the whiteness of the skin between the freckles.
95 Since freckled
people tend not to tan, but rather to burn,their skin may be whiter
than those who do tan. This is the color intended: the white hue of
untanned and unburnt skin between freckles.
96 Though M. quotes
these words, they must have fallen into the text of Rashi in error,
because they contradict the Mishnah at Nego'im 10, 10; reliable
manuscripts do not contain them (L.B.).
97 Mishnah Nego'im 10, 10.
98 Including other shades of white---how do we know that all the
skin eruptions which have signs of uncleanness are indeed unclean when
they appear in the front or back, where baldness occurs?
99 Which
comes to include all other types of skin eruptions which may appear in
hairy parts of the head.
100 13, 2 above.
101 As set forth in Mishnah Nego'im 1, 1; see n. 28 above.
102 Set
forth in verses 45--46.
103 Once again, the doubled verb for
emphasis implies a wider or more intensive halochoh; see n. 86.
104 In the next verse.
105 As a sign of mourning for his unclean
and isolated state; just as a mourner makes a tear in his clothes as a
sign of his sorrow.
106 Moustache.
107 Sifra Nego'im, per. 12, 7; Moed Koton 5a.
108
Arochin 16b.
109 The Israelite camp in the wilderness was made of
three concentric encampments: one for the Israelites, one for the tribe
of Levi, and one for the Tabernacle.
110 Rashi here wishes to ensure
that we not misunderstand the particle vov, which can mean
either "and" or "or." Here it definitely must mean "or," since
verse 52 below specifically uses the word o, "or."
111 That is, leather which has not been cured, but with which a
container was manufactured; though it is not cured, it still may become
unclean because it does serve a function; see Mishnah Kelim 17, 15 and
the commentary of R. Shimshon of Sens on it (B.B.).
112 It was
cured, and a container was made of it; this is the usual type of skin
container which can aquire uncleanness.
113 Literally, "green among
the greens."
114 Literally, "red among the reds."
115 Yechezkel
28, 24.
116 Sifra Nego'im, per. 14, 11. Rashi cites a midrashic explanation
because he feels the plain sense is somewhat insufficient here, since
it is clear that a tzora'as will be uncomfortable and prickly.
Thus, he adds the Midrash which relates {Hebrew Ref} to the
word {Hebrew Ref} , "curse" (L.B.).
117 The juxtaposition of
the word {Hebrew Ref} , "it," to the phrase "it shall be burnt in
fire" yields the exclusion presented. Strictly speaking, that {Hebrew Ref} is not necessary, and may be used for midrashic purposes.
118 The
garment.
119 Sifra Nego'im, per. 15, 1.
120 Literally, "that which is in it."
121 Thus indicating
that more than just the affected place is to be washed.
122 And
not the entire garment.
123 That is near to the place of the
eruption.
124 But remained as is---it is nonetheless unclean.
125 It is not clear that the sign of turning color is worse than
if it remained the same, since according to our verse, even if the
eruption did not turn color, the garment is unclean; which alternative
is worse? That is the question Rashi raises in the name of R. Yehudah
(M.). Put another way, verses 51--54 deal with cases in which the {Hebrew Ref} spreads or does not spread, but not at all with the
question of a color change; these possibilities come into play only
during the second week of confinement. But verse 55 decrees that even
if the {Hebrew Ref} remains unchainged in size and color after
the garment is washed, it is nevertheless unclean, and must be burnt.
If it fades, the {Hebrew Ref} itself must be torn out of the
garment (verse 56), and if the {Hebrew Ref} reappears, the
garment is burnt. The case of color change, unless it fades entirely,
in which case the garment becomes clean (verse 58), is not dealt with
directly. To what shall we compare it?
126 Verse 50.
127 Thus,
it must be reexamined even in the case of doubt which Rashi just
raised; this then is the decision in the case of color change.
128 Sifra Nego'im, per. 15, 7. Sifra continues, according to the
reading of the Ra'avad: But the Sages say: It is definitely unclean
since it has remained unchanged. How then do I interpret [the verse]:
"behold, the eruption did not change its hue"? [It remained] in
whatever hue [made it] unclean.
129 Instead of in its proper
place above.
130 Shmuel II, 17, 9.
131 Sifra Nego'im,
per. 15, 8.
132 Literally, however, the words refer to frontal
baldness ( {Hebrew Ref} ) or baldness in the back of his head (
{Hebrew Ref} ); the question is what these expressions mean when
transferred to a garment; and this Rashi proceeds to explain.
133
One of the thirteen major principles of midrashic interpretation,
whereby the occurence of a similar word in two places teaches us that
the rule which applies to the one applies to the other. These teachings
have been transmitted from Moshe at Sinai. In this case, the unusual
use of these words in this context signals the presence of a {Hebrew Ref} .
134 I.e., baldness in back of the head, "the end."
135 I.e.,
frontal baldness, "the beginning."
136 Verse 41 above.
137
Sifra Nego'im, per. 15, 9.
138 As the next verse explains: "it
is a recurrent outbreak of {Hebrew Ref} ; you shall burn it in
fire"---thus indicating that whatever is affected by the {Hebrew Ref} of garments must be burnt, even this scrap of cloth.
139 As the verse stipulates: "you shall burn it"---all of
it.
140 As in verse 54.
141 Meaning that the garment is
cleaned by being washed.
142 I.e., immersed.
Return to Main Search Form
Sources