Selection from LAYERS OF MEANING on Parashas Mishpatim

 

Parashas Mishpatim

ESSAY #35 : To give, or to redeem?

THE TEXT

The Torah commands us to give our first-born sons to Hashem; it then gives us the minimum age of an animal that can be presented to Hashem as a korban.

(כב:כח) בכור בניך תתן לי.

(כב:כט) כן תעשה לשורך לצאנך שבעת ימים היהי עם עמו ביום השמיני תתנו לי

(22:28) The firstborn of your sons you shall give to Me.

(22:29) So you shall do for your ox and your flocks; seven days [the newborn] shall be with its mother, on the eighth day you can give it to Me [as a korban].

RASHI

We will focus on Rashi’s comments about the mitzva of giving the firstborn to Hashem.

בכור בניך תתן לי: לפדותו בחמש סלעים מן הכהן. והלא כבר צוה עליו במקום אחר, אלא כדי לסמוך לו "כן תעשה לשורך", מה בכור אדם לאחר שלושים יום פודהו שנאמר (במדבר יח:טז) "ופדויו מבן חדש תפדה", אף בכור בהמה דקה מטפל בו שלשים יום ואחר כך נותנו לכהן.

The firstborn of your sons you shall give to Me: [This means] to redeem him for five sela coins from the Kohen. But didn’t the Torah already command this about him in a different place?! But [it is repeated here] in order to juxtapose it [to what is written in the next verse] “So you shall do with your ox,” [to teach us] just as a firstborn human child you redeem him thirty days after birth, as it says (Bemidbar 18:16) “His redemption you will redeem from when he is one month old,” so too the firstborn of a small animal [such as a sheep or goat] you must care for it for thirty days and afterward you give it to the Kohen.

According to Rashi, the Torah juxtaposed a verse about Pidyon Haben--the redemption of a firstborn human child (Verse 28)--to a verse about the redemption of a firstborn animal (Verse 29) in order to teach us that both mitzvos are to be performed on the thirtieth day of the newborn’s life.

QUESTION

A question on Rashi’s question

Rashi questions our verse’s commandment to redeem a firstborn child since this mitzva is stated in another verse in the Torah. A footnote in the Toras Chaim edition of Rashi identifies the other verse as Bemidbar 19:16, a verse which Rashi himself mentions near the end of his comment. If that verse is the basis for Rashi’s question, then we must ask: Why does Rashi break his usual rule and ask a question based on a later verse? Usually, Rashi will wait until he arrives at the second verse in order to raise the question that it repeats or contradicts a previous verse.

ANSWERS

A simple correction

Rashi questions why the mitzva of Pidyon Haben is repeated in our verse in Parashas Mishpatim. Until now, we have assumed--based on a footnote in the Toras Chaim edition--that the other mention of this mitzva is in a later verse, Bemidbar 19:16. This created a problem: Why is Rashi asking about the repetition of a mitzva in a verse that we have not yet learned?

A simple solution to this would be to reject this footnote. The verse in Bemidbar cited by the footnote is not the only other mention of this mitzva. The mitzva has been mentioned in a previous verse in the Torah in Parashas Bo (Shemos 13:13):

And every firstborn human child amongst your children you shall redeem...

If we will say that this verse is the source of Rashi’s question, then Rashi is following his usual practice of discussing the repetition of an idea when he comments on the verse where it is repeated.

A more profound approach

A more profound approach to answering our question is to say that Rashi is not primarily concerned with the repetition of this mitzva, and that it is irrelevant whether that repetition occurs in a later verse or an earlier verse. Rather, Rashi’s primary concern is to define the mitzva that is expressed in the words, “The firstborn of your sons you shall give to Me.”

The simple translation of these words indicates that a person must literally give his first-born child to Hashem. In fact, some commentators explain the verse this way; Sforno, for example, writes:

The firstborn of your sons you shall give to Me, for all holy service, for the service of the Beis Hamikdash and for the study of Torah, similar to the way it was later with the Kohanim, as Scripture says (Malachi 2:7) “For the lips of the Kohen will preserve knowledge, and Torah they will seek from his mouth.”¹

Rashi, however, in the first few words of his comment on this verse, rejects this interpretation; instead, Rashi says that giving the first-born to Hashem is accomplished by redeeming him for five sela coins from the Kohen. One reason why Rashi may have rejected Sforno’s approach is because there are a number of verses in the Torah which mention redeeming a first-born son, but this is the only verse that mentions actually giving the first-born to Hashem². Rashi resolved this contradiction by saying that even this verse really means that we should redeem, rather than give, the first-born.

Rashi further supports his approach--and refutes Sforno’s interpretation--by quoting a question and answer that he found in the words of the Sages³. The Sages ask about our verse, “Isn’t this mitzva stated elsewhere?” and they answer that our verse is coming to tell us a halachic detail about the mitzva of redeeming a first-born son. Both their question and their answer support Rashi’s interpretation that this verse is not saying that we should actually give our first-born to the service of Hashem, but rather that we should redeem him. The Sages’ question supports Rashi, because if this verse were saying that we should give our first-born to Hashem, then they would not have asked that this verse seems superfluous, because (as mentioned above) there is no other verse that says that the first-born should be given to Hashem. It must be that the Sages understood--like Rashi--that this verse really means that we should redeem the first-born. The Sages’ answer--that this verse is teaching us a specific halacha about the mitvza of redeeming the first-born--obviously supports Rashi’s interpretation.

An additional question

According to Rashi, our verse is referring to the mitzva of Pidyon Haben, a mitzva that we still perform today. According to Sforno, however, the verse is telling us to dedicate our first-born sons to the service of Hashem in the Beis Hamikdash and the study of Torah, “similar to the way it was later with the Kohanim.” It seems, then, that this mitzva was only observed during a very short time in history, following Matan Torah, because forty days later the first-born participated in the sin of the Golden Calf and their sacred tasks were taken over by Aharon and his descendants. Is it possible that a mitzva of the Torah should have such a temporary life?

Netziv, who explains similarly to Sforno, answers this question by adding that our verse is not only a commandment but also an eternal promise from Hashem that, barring inappropriate behavior, one’s firstborn son will become dedicated to Hashem, a leader in Israel and a person of importance.c

FOR FURTHER EXPLORATION

Scientific studies have shown that first-born children tend to perform better on cognitive tests and eventually earn more money than their younger siblings⁴. In what ways is the promise mentioned by Netziv similar to these findings, and in what ways is it different?

1

See also Netziv.

2 Although B’midbar 18:16 says that we must “present to Hashem” the first-born of every woman, it immediately clarifies that this is accomplished by redeeming the first-born by giving five shekel coins to a Kohen.

3 Bechoros 26b.

4 For example, see https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-first-born-children-may-have-greater-

success/.

Selection from LAYERS OF MEANING on Parashas Yisro

 

HASKAMOS

 

                

Rabbi Yitzchak Breitowitz

Yeshivas Ohr Someach, Yerushalayim

Teves 5785          

         For 900 years, the Torah commentary of R. Shlomo Ben Yitzchak, known as Rashi, has been the indispensable guide to explicating the word of God. Simple enough for the child, deep and challenging for the greatest talmid chacham, Rashi's commentary is unmatched in its clarity and beautiful concise style and its influence has been unparalleled. It was the very first Hebrew book to be printed and many assert with good reason that his peirush could only have been written with Ruach Hakodesh (Divine inspiration).               The apparent simplicity of Rashi is deceiving. There are hidden depths in every statement and indeed lessons to be learned in the omissions as well. What questions was Rashi trying to answer? Why did he deviate from what might appear to be a more obvious interpretation? Conversely, why did he feel the need to explain the obvious? Why does Rashi bring some midrashim and not others? Even in the midrashim he does bring, why does he often change the exact wording or sequence of the cited text? And what about those very hard to parse "dikduk Rashis," elucidating the mysteries of Hebrew grammar but which for many are in themselves mysterious and obscure? There are over 300 commentaries on Rashi that grapple with these questions but few have the time or the skill to delve into them. The sad result is that the immense riches that lie beneath the surface of Rashi's "simple" words are never uncovered.          Yochanon  Joseph, a conscientious and dedicated student of Rashi's commentaries, has compiled a collection of essays (more than 500 pages!) elucidating many of these complexities. His presentations are clear, well-organized and comprehensive. I have no doubt that this work will be of great benefit to all who study Rashi, whether he (or she) is an intellectually-curious 9th grader or an experienced talmid chacham.         We owe the author a debt of gratitude for his labor of love in unlocking some of the hidden treasures in Rashi's commentary. May this sefer result in a deeper understanding of one of the greatest of Israel's teachers . Wishing you much hatzlacha in your avodas hakodesh, 

 Yitzchak A. Breitowitz,

 Rav Kehillas Ohr Somayach 

Rabbi Yisrael Isser Zvi Herczeg 

Author of Patterns in Rashi, Understanding Rashi, Darchei Rashi 

    I was delighted to receive a copy of Layers of Meaning by my dear friend, Rav Yochanan Moshe Joseph. Rav Joseph is not merely a great expositor of Rashi, he is a great teacher of Rashi. His books do more than reveal the deeper meanings of Rashi’s rich and concise comments. They are directed at imparting to the reader the methods by which he can analyze Rashi’s comments and discover their deeper implications on his own. Rav Joseph takes a Rashi, breaks it down, and puts it back together again step by step. He presents the immediate meaning of the Rashi, and presents us with some difficulty with it, or some nuance in wording that points to something lurking beneath the surface. Rav Joseph doesn’t merely present the solution to the problem. He explains every stage of the analysis that leads to his conclusion, and thereby opens the reader’s eyes to the techniques by which Rashi’s words can be fully deciphered.

           Quotations from Rashi often serve as a springboard for excellent derashos and sermons, which elaborate on the ideas in the quotation. But rarely do we find people analyzing the wording of Rashi to extract its ethical or philosophical implications. There is a long tradition of this approach among the classical commentators, from the Gur Aryeh, to the Maskil LeDavid, to the Lubavitcher Rebbe. In Layers of Meaning Rav Joseph carries on this tradition, and points out how Rashi’s words are carefully designed to convey messages essential to the yerei Shamayim’s outlook on the world. The author’s writing style is clear and lively. It is hard to imagine anyone who cares about Torah study not enjoying this sefer. It is even harder to imagine anyone not coming away from it with a deeper appreciation and understanding of Rashi. May HaKadosh Baruch Hu continue to enable Rav Joseph to explore more areas of Torah and enrich Am Yisrael with his discoveries.  

Rabbi Baruch Simon

Yeshivas Rabbenu Yitzchak Elchanan

My dear friend, Rabbi Yochanon Joseph presented me with a masterful sefer on Rashi’s commentary on the Torah. Many individuals learn Rashi’s commentary on the Torah, however, very often the learning is very superficial. Rabbi Joseph’s sefer gives the student who studies Rashi a deep understanding of Rashi’s intent with very often a very brief presentation which Rashi has written. I highly recommend learning this sefer which will give the Talmid a broad and deep understanding of Rashi’s classical commentary on the Torah. 

 With best wishes, 

 Rabbi Baruch Simon

Coming Soon! LAYERS OF MEANING: EXPLORING RASHI'S ROOTS AND RAMIFICATIONS

 Coming soon -

Layers of Meaning is a book that introduces the reader to the world of serious exploration of Rashi’s commentary. The reader will be introduced to some of the following questions, and will learn some of the methods that great scholars throughout the generations have used to answer them:

*What are the true sources of Rashi’s comments?

*What were some of the “rules” that guided Rashi, and how can we understand why sometimes Rashi seems to have ignored those rules?

*How can we understand the inner dynamics of some of Rashi’s longer comments?

*What can we legitimately conclude from Rashi’s silence about some verses?

*How did Rashi decide where to place his comment if it was relevant to two different verses?

*When did Rashi limit himself to the absolute simple meaning of the verse in front of him, and when–and why–did he go beyond this boundary?

*How can we explore the ethical-philosophical-spiritual ramifications of Rashi’s comments–while staying true to a straightforward interpretation of his words?

CLICK HERE TO READ THE INTRODUCTION                      

CLICK HERE TO READ THE HASKAMOS

CLICK HERE TO READ SELECTIONS FROM THE BOOK

Samples from LAYERS OF MEANING: EXPLORING RASHI'S ROOTS AND RAMIFICATIONS

 INTRODUCTION

     Rashi’s commentary on the Torah is the most popular but least understood of all the great commentaries. It is studied by young and old, by novice and scholar, and is mentioned in nearly every speech and article about the weekly Torah reading, not to mention in nearly every speech and article about any topic in the Torah at all. Yet, Rashi’s commentary is rarely explained fully, and oftentimes, regrettably mis-explained. Many times, Rashi’s commentary is used merely as a convenient reference; it is easier to find a statement of our Sages in Rashi than it is to find it in the large tomes of Talmud or Midrash from which he quotes it. Other times, when an attempt is made to explain Rashi’s comment, it is done in the context of Talmud and Midrash, but not in context of Rashi’s commentary itself, which is a separate, albeit strongly connected, entity. What is the source of Rashi’s comment in the text of the Torah, rather than in the “mathematics” of Midrash, Talmud and their commentaries? How does this particular Rashi comment relate to other comments that he makes on related verses? What are the inner dynamics that connect one part of a long comment to the others? These questions are often left untouched, as the speaker or writer builds a beautiful structure of picturesque midrashim and profound Talmudic logic. Some speakers and writers commit an even greater “crime”: They present Rashi’s comment, raise a question on it, and then proceed to say that the verse must be interpreted differently. No attempt is made to give Rashi the “courtesy” of attempting to answer the question! 

Rashi’s incredible accomplishment 

     The truth is that Rashi’s comments on the Torah deserve and demand our fullest and most diligent attention. Rashi’s grandson, Rabeinu Tam, was a supreme and courageous genius of Talmud and halacha; his resolutions of apparent contradictions in the Talmud often “create” new laws, many of which have been codified and observed for centuries. Rabeinu Tam never hesitated to disagree in Talmudic debate with his illustrious grandfather. Yet, when it came to Rashi’s commentary on the Torah, Rabeinu Tam felt that he could not compete: 

That which my master, my grandfather, explained the Talmud, I also could do; but his commentary on Scripture is not within my powers, for I could not do it. 

If Rabeinu Tam felt that he could not approach his grandfather’s capabilities as an exegete of Scripture, then certainly we must not approach Rashi’s commentary as nothing more than a convenient treasury of beloved statements from our Sages. 

Aspects of Rashi’s commentary that deserve attention 

     The serious attention that must be directed toward Rashi’s commentary can be divided into numerous categories. The following is a list of some of the areas that must be explored, particularly those which are discussed in this book. 

• Rashi’s sources must be explored, and they must be identified in Scripture itself, not merely in Talmud and Midrash. Rashi did not write an introduction to his commentary, and he rarely discusses his methodology in an explicit way. The one great principle that he does share with us is in his comments to Shemos 33:13. Rashi explains several verses there according to his own understanding of their simple and direct meaning, even though the Talmud clearly explains them differently! Rashi “apologizes” with the following statement: 

Our Rabbis expounded [these verses differently] in tractate Brachos [7a], but I have come to resolve the verses according to their context and their sequence. 

There are many ramifications to this statement by Rashi. Perhaps most important is that we must seek the sources of Rashi’s comments not primarily in Talmud and Midrash, but rather in Scripture itself. Even when Rashi quotes the Sages explicitly, it does not mean that he is accepting their interpretation on authority. Rather, it means that after careful analysis of the verse, Rashi has concluded that the Sages’ interpretation is the simple and direct meaning, and not a homiletical insight that is perhaps only tangentially relevant to the text. 

 •We must explore the possibility that Rashi has quoted a statement of our Sages, but he has adapted it for his own purposes. 

•We must explore Rashi’s placement of his comments. Usually, Rashi places a comment in the first possible place, but sometimes he waits. Sometimes he quotes a comment of our Sages on the same verse that they commented on, while other times he places the comment elsewhere. 

•We must explore Rashi’s dibur hamas’chil, the words from Scripture that Rashi quotes and highlights at the beginning of his comments. These indicate the exact words in Scripture that Rashi intends to explain. 

 •Most of Rashi’s comments are in response to an implicit, unwritten question that he had on the text. Therefore, we must explore the text of Scripture to find the questions that “bothered” Rashi and led him to make a comment. 

•When Rashi does occasionally write a question explicitly, we must explore the reason why he has abandoned his usual habit of relying on implicit questions. 

•We must explore Rashi’s grammatical and etymological explanations and strive to understand how they affect the simple meaning of Scripture. 

•Rashi usually focuses on the verse that is “in front” of him, not on later verses in Scripture. When Rashi occasionally “breaks” this rule and discusses later verses, we must explore his reasons for doing so. 

 •There are some topics which Rashi generally avoids, because Scripture itself does not usually discuss them; among these topics are halachic details, the reasons for mitzvos, and the correct counting of the Torah’s 613 commandments. When Rashi does occasionally discuss these topics, we must explore how they assisted him in clarifying the simple meaning of Scripture. 

•Rashi often states his main point in the first few words of his comment; everything that he writes afterward is only meant to strengthen his original point. Therefore, we must examine the first few words of each Rashi comment with extra care, and we must explore the inner dynamics of some of his longer comments. 

•We must be aware that Rashi wrote a complete commentary. One ramification of this is that we should not assume that one Rashi comment contradicts another. Rather, we must explore, as much as possible, the probability that Rashi is not merely quoting two different opinions,but rather is presenting us with a unified understanding of Scripture. 

•When Rashi does not comment on a verse, we should not assume that he had nothing interesting to say about it, or that he expected us to look at other commentaries. Since Rashi wrote a complete commentary, we must explore how every verse in the Torah--including those that Rashi does not comment on--can be explained either by common sense or by referencing Rashi’s comments on other verses. The goal of our study of Rashi’s commentary must be to arrive at an understanding of everything in the Torah, on the level of peshuto shel mikra - the simple meaning of Scripture, which is the level that Rashi discusses. 

•Needless to say, Rashi knew all the same sources that his detractors did, and he was capable of answering the questions that they raised on his commentary. Therefore, we must explore ways to resolve the problems that other commentators raised on Rashi.

     Exploring Rashi on a technical level and on a content level

     All of these areas of exploration are on what could be called the technical level. They help us understand Rashi’s meaning in the way that a Chinese-English dictionary would help us to understand a text written in Chinese. They allow us to achieve a clear understanding of what Rashi’s interpretation of the verse is. They do not, in themselves, tell us the ethical, psychological, spiritual, philosophical, or historical ramifications of Rashi’s interpretation. All of these angles also must be explored if we are to arrive at a full appreciation of a Rashi comment. 

     It is difficult to establish “rules” for these explorations in the way that we can establish them for exploring the technical side of Rashi. There are certain sefarim which often delve into these explorations; among them are: Gur Aryeh, Maskil L’David, Imrei Shefer, Be’er Basadeh, Likutei Sichos, Understanding Rashi, and a contemporary work that I have only recently merited to sample, B’ikvos Rashi. 

     One principle that we can learn from all of these works is that the philosophical aspects of understanding Rashi are not detached from the technical aspects. A really good philosophical insight to a Rashi comment should not ignore the rigorous application of the technical methods that we have discussed above; rather, the best philosophical ideas are those that flow directly from a rigorous technical analysis. This is why a serious student of Rashi must be somewhat wary of the great library of Chassidic works that often base their philosophical ideas on interpretations of Rashi. Although the ideas of these Chasidic masters are profound and inspiring, they are not always based on a peshat-level analysis of Rashi’s intent. As such, they often belong to a separate, and very important, genre of thought, but not to the genre of serious interpretation of Rashi on his own terms. 

An invitation 

The author of his book knows very well that he has not fully explored any of the aforementioned aspects of Rashi’s commentary. He sees this book as an invitation to the reader to join him in explorations of Rashi’s commentary--and perhaps to take these explorations even farther than he was able to. As Shlomo  Hamelech said (Mishlei 9:9), “Give instruction to a wise man and he will become even wiser.”

Directions in Rashi Podcast on Parashas Acharei - תשפ"ד

Parashas Acharei Mos * פרשת אחרי מות תשפ"ד 

Cutting and Pasting a Verse

Click here to listen

SOURCE SHEET:

פ' אחרי מות 

תשפ"ד

(טז:כג) וּבָ֤א אַֽהֲרֹן֙ אֶל־אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֔ד וּפָשַׁט֙ אֶת־בִּגְדֵ֣י הַבָּ֔ד אֲשֶׁ֥ר לָבַ֖שׁ בְּבֹא֣וֹ אֶל־הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ וְהִנִּיחָ֖ם שָֽׁם.

רש"י: ובא אהרן אל־אהל מועד. אמרו רבותינו שאין זה מקומו של מקרא זה ונתנו טעם לדבריהם במסכת יומא ואמרו, כל הפרשה כלה נאמרה על הסדר חוץ מביאה זו שהיא אחר עשית עולתו ועולת העם והקטרת אמורי פר ושעיר, שנעשים בחוץ בבגדי זהב, וטובל ומקדש ופושטן ולובש בגדי לבן:

ובא אל־אהל מועד. להוציא את הכף ואת המחתה שהקטיר בה הקטרת לפני ולפנים:

ופשט את־בגדי הבד. אחר שהוציאה, ולובש בגדי זהב לתמיד של בין הערבים. וזהו סדר העבודות: תמיד של שחר בבגדי זהב, ועבודת פר ושעיר הפנימיים וקטרת של מחתה בבגדי לבן, ואילו ואיל העם ומקצת המוספין בבגדי זהב, והוצאת כף ומחתה בבגדי לבן, ושירי המוספין ותמיד של בין הערבים וקטרת ההיכל שעל מזבח הפנימי בבגדי זהב; וסדר המקראות לפי העבודות כך הוא, ושלח את השעיר במדבר, ורחץ את בשרו במים וגו', ויצא ועשה את עלתו וגו', ואת חלב החטאת וגו', וכל הפרשה עד ואחרי כן יבוא אל המחנה  ואחר כך ובא אהרן:

והניחם שם. מלמד שטעונין גניזה ולא ישתמש באותן ד' בגדים ליום הכפורים אחר. 

**************************

א וַיְדַבֵּ֤ר יְהוָֹה֙ אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֔ה אַֽחֲרֵ֣י מ֔וֹת שְׁנֵ֖י בְּנֵ֣י אַֽהֲרֹ֑ן בְּקָרְבָתָ֥ם לִפְנֵֽי־יְהוָֹ֖ה וַיָּמֻֽתוּ: ב וַיֹּ֨אמֶר יְהֹוָ֜ה אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֗ה דַּבֵּר֘ אֶל־אַֽהֲרֹ֣ן אָחִ֒יךָ֒ וְאַל־יָבֹ֤א בְכָל־עֵת֙ אֶל־הַקֹּ֔דֶשׁ מִבֵּ֖ית לַפָּרֹ֑כֶת אֶל־פְּנֵ֨י הַכַּפֹּ֜רֶת אֲשֶׁ֤ר עַל־הָֽאָרֹן֙ וְלֹ֣א יָמ֔וּת כִּ֚י בֶּֽעָנָ֔ן אֵֽרָאֶ֖ה עַל־הַכַּפֹּֽרֶת: ג בְּזֹ֛את יָבֹ֥א אַֽהֲרֹ֖ן אֶל־הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ בְּפַ֧ר בֶּן־בָּקָ֛ר לְחַטָּ֖את וְאַ֥יִל לְעֹלָֽה: ד כְּתֹֽנֶת־בַּ֨ד קֹ֜דֶשׁ יִלְבָּ֗שׁ וּמִֽכְנְסֵי־בַד֘ יִהְי֣וּ עַל־בְּשָׂרוֹ֒ וּבְאַבְנֵ֥ט בַּד֙ יַחְגֹּ֔ר וּבְמִצְנֶ֥פֶת בַּ֖ד יִצְנֹ֑ף בִּגְדֵי־קֹ֣דֶשׁ הֵ֔ם וְרָחַ֥ץ בַּמַּ֛יִם אֶת־בְּשָׂר֖וֹ וּלְבֵשָֽׁם: ה וּמֵאֵ֗ת עֲדַת֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל יִקַּ֛ח שְׁנֵֽי־שְׂעִירֵ֥י עִזִּ֖ים לְחַטָּ֑את וְאַ֥יִל אֶחָ֖ד לְעֹלָֽה: ו וְהִקְרִ֧יב אַֽהֲרֹ֛ן אֶת־פַּ֥ר הַֽחַטָּ֖את אֲשֶׁר־ל֑וֹ וְכִפֶּ֥ר בַּֽעֲד֖וֹ וּבְעַ֥ד בֵּיתֽוֹ: ז וְלָקַ֖ח אֶת־שְׁנֵ֣י הַשְּׂעִירִ֑ם וְהֶֽעֱמִ֤יד אֹתָם֙ לִפְנֵ֣י יְהֹוָ֔ה פֶּ֖תַח אֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵֽד: ח וְנָתַ֧ן אַֽהֲרֹ֛ן עַל־שְׁנֵ֥י הַשְּׂעִירִ֖ם גֹּֽרָל֑וֹת גּוֹרָ֤ל אֶחָד֙ לַֽיהֹוָ֔ה וְגוֹרָ֥ל אֶחָ֖ד לַֽעֲזָאזֵֽל: ט וְהִקְרִ֤יב אַֽהֲרֹן֙ אֶת־הַשָּׂעִ֔יר אֲשֶׁ֨ר עָלָ֥ה עָלָ֛יו הַגּוֹרָ֖ל לַֽיהוָֹ֑ה וְעָשָׂ֖הוּ חַטָּֽאת: י וְהַשָּׂעִ֗יר אֲשֶׁ֖ר֩ עָלָ֨ה עָלָ֤יו הַגּוֹרָל֙ לַֽעֲזָאזֵ֔ל יָֽעֳמַד־חַ֛י לִפְנֵ֥י יְהוָֹ֖ה לְכַפֵּ֣ר עָלָ֑יו לְשַׁלַּ֥ח אֹת֛וֹ לַֽעֲזָאזֵ֖ל הַמִּדְבָּֽרָה: יא וְהִקְרִ֨יב אַֽהֲרֹ֜ן אֶת־פַּ֤ר הַֽחַטָּאת֙ אֲשֶׁר־ל֔וֹ וְכִפֶּ֥ר בַּֽעֲד֖וֹ וּבְעַ֣ד בֵּית֑וֹ וְשָׁחַ֛ט אֶת־פַּ֥ר הַֽחַטָּ֖את אֲשֶׁר־לֽוֹ: יב וְלָקַ֣ח מְלֹֽא־הַ֠מַּחְתָּ֠ה גַּֽחֲלֵי־אֵ֞שׁ מֵעַ֤ל הַמִּזְבֵּ֨חַ֙ מִלִּפְנֵ֣י יְהֹוָ֔ה וּמְלֹ֣א חָפְנָ֔יו קְטֹ֥רֶת סַמִּ֖ים דַּקָּ֑ה וְהֵבִ֖יא מִבֵּ֥ית לַפָּרֹֽכֶת: יג וְנָתַ֧ן אֶת־הַקְּטֹ֛רֶת עַל־הָאֵ֖שׁ לִפְנֵ֣י יְהֹוָ֑ה וְכִסָּ֣ה ׀ עֲנַ֣ן הַקְּטֹ֗רֶת אֶת־הַכַּפֹּ֛רֶת אֲשֶׁ֥ר עַל־הָֽעֵד֖וּת וְלֹ֥א יָמֽוּת: יד וְלָקַח֙ מִדַּ֣ם הַפָּ֔ר וְהִזָּ֧ה בְאֶצְבָּע֛וֹ עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הַכַּפֹּ֖רֶת קֵ֑דְמָה וְלִפְנֵ֣י הַכַּפֹּ֗רֶת יַזֶּ֧ה שֶֽׁבַע־פְּעָמִ֛ים מִן־הַדָּ֖ם בְּאֶצְבָּעֽוֹ: טו וְשָׁחַ֞ט אֶת־שְׂעִ֤יר הַֽחַטָּאת֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר לָעָ֔ם וְהֵבִיא֙ אֶת־דָּמ֔וֹ אֶל־מִבֵּ֖ית לַפָּרֹ֑כֶת וְעָשָׂ֣ה אֶת־דָּמ֗וֹ כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֤ר עָשָׂה֙ לְדַ֣ם הַפָּ֔ר וְהִזָּ֥ה אֹת֛וֹ עַל־הַכַּפֹּ֖רֶת וְלִפְנֵ֥י הַכַּפֹּֽרֶת: טז וְכִפֶּ֣ר עַל־הַקֹּ֗דֶשׁ מִטֻּמְאֹת֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וּמִפִּשְׁעֵיהֶ֖ם לְכָל־חַטֹּאתָ֑ם וְכֵ֤ן יַֽעֲשֶׂה֙ לְאֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֔ד הַשֹּׁכֵ֣ן אִתָּ֔ם בְּת֖וֹךְ טֻמְאֹתָֽם: יז וְכָל־אָדָ֞ם לֹא־יִֽהְיֶ֣ה ׀ בְּאֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֗ד בְּבֹא֛וֹ לְכַפֵּ֥ר בַּקֹּ֖דֶשׁ עַד־צֵאת֑וֹ וְכִפֶּ֤ר בַּֽעֲדוֹ֙ וּבְעַ֣ד בֵּית֔וֹ וּבְעַ֖ד כָּל־קְהַ֥ל יִשְׂרָאֵֽל: יח וְיָצָ֗א אֶל־הַמִּזְבֵּ֛חַ אֲשֶׁ֥ר לִפְנֵֽי־יְהוָֹ֖ה וְכִפֶּ֣ר עָלָ֑יו וְלָקַ֞ח מִדַּ֤ם הַפָּר֙ וּמִדַּ֣ם הַשָּׂעִ֔יר וְנָתַ֛ן עַל־קַרְנ֥וֹת הַמִּזְבֵּ֖חַ סָבִֽיב: יט וְהִזָּ֨ה עָלָ֧יו מִן־הַדָּ֛ם בְּאֶצְבָּע֖וֹ שֶׁ֣בַע פְּעָמִ֑ים וְטִֽהֲר֣וֹ וְקִדְּשׁ֔וֹ מִטֻּמְאֹ֖ת בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל: כ וְכִלָּה֙ מִכַּפֵּ֣ר אֶת־הַקֹּ֔דֶשׁ וְאֶת־אֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵ֖ד וְאֶת־הַמִּזְבֵּ֑חַ וְהִקְרִ֖יב אֶת־הַשָּׂעִ֥יר הֶחָֽי: כא וְסָמַ֨ךְ אַֽהֲרֹ֜ן אֶת־שְׁתֵּ֣י יָדָ֗ו [יָדָ֗יו] עַל־רֹ֣אשׁ הַשָּׂעִיר֘ הַחַי֒ וְהִתְוַדָּ֣ה עָלָ֗יו אֶת־כָּל־עֲוֹנֹת֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וְאֶת־כָּל־פִּשְׁעֵיהֶ֖ם לְכָל־חַטֹּאתָ֑ם וְנָתַ֤ן אֹתָם֙ עַל־רֹ֣אשׁ הַשָּׂעִ֔יר וְשִׁלַּ֛ח בְּיַד־אִ֥ישׁ עִתִּ֖י הַמִּדְבָּֽרָה: כב וְנָשָׂ֨א הַשָּׂעִ֥יר עָלָ֛יו אֶת־כָּל־עֲוֹנֹתָ֖ם אֶל־אֶ֣רֶץ גְּזֵרָ֑ה וְשִׁלַּ֥ח אֶת־הַשָּׂעִ֖יר בַּמִּדְבָּֽר: כג וּבָ֤א אַֽהֲרֹן֙ אֶל־אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֔ד וּפָשַׁט֙ אֶת־בִּגְדֵ֣י הַבָּ֔ד אֲשֶׁ֥ר לָבַ֖שׁ בְּבֹא֣וֹ אֶל־הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ וְהִנִּיחָ֖ם שָֽׁם: כד וְרָחַ֨ץ אֶת־בְּשָׂר֤וֹ בַמַּ֨יִם֙ בְּמָק֣וֹם קָד֔וֹשׁ וְלָבַ֖שׁ אֶת־בְּגָדָ֑יו וְיָצָ֗א וְעָשָׂ֤ה אֶת־עֹֽלָתוֹ֙ וְאֶת־עֹלַ֣ת הָעָ֔ם וְכִפֶּ֥ר בַּֽעֲד֖וֹ וּבְעַ֥ד הָעָֽם: כה וְאֵ֛ת חֵ֥לֶב הַֽחַטָּ֖את יַקְטִ֥יר הַמִּזְבֵּֽחָה: כג וּבָ֤א אַֽהֲרֹן֙ אֶל־אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֔ד וּפָשַׁט֙ אֶת־בִּגְדֵ֣י הַבָּ֔ד אֲשֶׁ֥ר לָבַ֖שׁ בְּבֹא֣וֹ אֶל־הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ וְהִנִּיחָ֖ם שָֽׁם: כו וְהַֽמְשַׁלֵּ֤חַ אֶת־הַשָּׂעִיר֙ לַֽעֲזָאזֵ֔ל יְכַבֵּ֣ס בְּגָדָ֔יו וְרָחַ֥ץ אֶת־בְּשָׂר֖וֹ בַּמָּ֑יִם וְאַֽחֲרֵי־כֵ֖ן יָב֥וֹא אֶל־הַֽמַּֽחֲנֶֽה: כז וְאֵת֩ פַּ֨ר הַֽחַטָּ֜את וְאֵ֣ת ׀ שְׂעִ֣יר הַֽחַטָּ֗את אֲשֶׁ֨ר הוּבָ֤א אֶת־דָּמָם֙ לְכַפֵּ֣ר בַּקֹּ֔דֶשׁ יוֹצִ֖יא אֶל־מִח֣וּץ לַֽמַּֽחֲנֶ֑ה וְשָֽׂרְפ֣וּ בָאֵ֔שׁ אֶת־עֹֽרֹתָ֥ם וְאֶת־בְּשָׂרָ֖ם וְאֶת־פִּרְשָֽׁם: כח וְהַשּׂרֵ֣ף אֹתָ֔ם יְכַבֵּ֣ס בְּגָדָ֔יו וְרָחַ֥ץ אֶת־בְּשָׂר֖וֹ בַּמָּ֑יִם וְאַֽחֲרֵי־כֵ֖ן יָב֥וֹא אֶל־הַֽמַּֽחֲנֶֽה: כט וְהָֽיְתָ֥ה לָכֶ֖ם לְחֻקַּ֣ת עוֹלָ֑ם בַּחֹ֣דֶשׁ הַ֠שְּׁבִיעִ֠י בֶּֽעָשׂ֨וֹר לַחֹ֜דֶשׁ תְּעַנּ֣וּ אֶת־נַפְשֹֽׁתֵיכֶ֗ם וְכָל־מְלָאכָה֙ לֹ֣א תַֽעֲשׂ֔וּ הָֽאֶזְרָ֔ח וְהַגֵּ֖ר הַגָּ֥ר בְּתֽוֹכֲכֶֽם: ל כִּֽי־בַיּ֥וֹם הַזֶּ֛ה יְכַפֵּ֥ר עֲלֵיכֶ֖ם לְטַהֵ֣ר אֶתְכֶ֑ם מִכֹּל֙ חַטֹּ֣אתֵיכֶ֔ם לִפְנֵ֥י יְהוָֹ֖ה תִּטְהָֽרוּ: לא שַׁבַּ֨ת שַׁבָּת֥וֹן הִיא֙ לָכֶ֔ם וְעִנִּיתֶ֖ם אֶת־נַפְשֹֽׁתֵיכֶ֑ם חֻקַּ֖ת עוֹלָֽם: לב וְכִפֶּ֨ר הַכֹּהֵ֜ן אֲשֶׁר־יִמְשַׁ֣ח אֹת֗וֹ וַֽאֲשֶׁ֤ר יְמַלֵּא֙ אֶת־יָד֔וֹ לְכַהֵ֖ן תַּ֣חַת אָבִ֑יו וְלָבַ֛שׁ אֶת־בִּגְדֵ֥י הַבָּ֖ד בִּגְדֵ֥י הַקֹּֽדֶשׁ: לג וְכִפֶּר֙ אֶת־מִקְדַּ֣שׁ הַקֹּ֔דֶשׁ וְאֶת־אֹ֧הֶל מוֹעֵ֛ד וְאֶת־הַמִּזְבֵּ֖חַ יְכַפֵּ֑ר וְעַ֧ל הַכֹּֽהֲנִ֛ים וְעַל־כָּל־עַ֥ם הַקָּהָ֖ל יְכַפֵּֽר: לד וְהָֽיְתָה־זֹּ֨את לָכֶ֜ם לְחֻקַּ֣ת עוֹלָ֗ם לְכַפֵּ֞ר עַל־בְּנֵ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ מִכָּל־חַטֹּאתָ֔ם אַחַ֖ת בַּשָּׁנָ֑ה וַיַּ֕עַשׂ כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֛ר צִוָּ֥ה יְהוָֹ֖ה אֶת־מֹשֶֽׁה:  

מס' יומא דף לב עמוד א

תנו רבנן "ובא אהרן אל אהל מועד" למה הוא בא אינו בא אלא להוציא את הכף ואת המחתה (שכל) הפרשה כולה נאמרה על הסדר חוץ מפסוק זה

רש"י: שכל הפרשה. נאמרו המקראות על סדר העבודות המחלפות כסידרן בפרשה כך סדר עבודתם חוץ ממקרא זה שכתב הוצאת כף ומחתה עם עבודות הפנימיות ולא הפסיק עבודת אילו ואיל העם בנתיים והיה לו לכתוב בתחילה ויצא ועשה את עולתו וגו' ואח"כ ובא אהרן להוציא כף ומחתה ואח"כ ופשט את בגדי הבד והניחם שם ורחץ את בשרו במים ולבש את בגדיו שמונה של כל השנה ועשה המוספין ותמיד של בין הערבים.

מאי טעמא?

רש"י: צריך להפסיק באילו ואיל עם בין עבודת היום להוצאת כף ומחתה.

אמר רב חסדא גמירי חמש טבילות ועשרה קידושין טובל כהן גדול ומקדש בו ביום ואי כסדרן לא משכחת להו אלא שלש טבילות וששה קידושין.

רש"י: אמר רב חסדא גמירי. הלכה למשה מסיני.

חמש טבילות. בו ביום.

ואי כסידרן. של עבודות כתיב מקרא זה.

לא משכחת בהן אלא שלש טבילות. אחת לתמיד של שחר ואחת בינו ובין עבודת היום כולה עם הוצאת כף ומחתה ואחת בין הוצאת כף ומחתה לאילו ואיל העם ועמהם המוספין ותמיד של בין הערבים לפיכך צריך להפסיק אילו ואיל העם בין עבודת היום להוצאת כף ומחתה והוצאתן תפסיק בין אילו ואיל העם לתמיד של בין הערבים הרי חמש תמיד של שחר בבגדי זהב עבודת היום בבגדי לבן אילו ואיל העם בבגדי זהב על המזבח החיצון הוצאת כף ומחתה בבגדי לבן ומוספין ותמיד של בין הערבים בבגדי זהב.

 

Directions in Rashi Podcast on Parashas Metzora - תשפ"ד

 

Parashas Metzora * פרשת מצורע תשפ"ד

Rashi's Explicit Question

Click here to listen

SOURCE SHEET:

פ' מצורע

תשפ"ד

(יד:לג) וַיְדַבֵּ֣ר ה' אֶל־משֶׁ֥ה וְאֶל־אַֽהֲרֹ֖ן לֵאמֹֽר. (לד) כִּ֤י תָבֹ֨אוּ֙ אֶל־אֶ֣רֶץ כְּנַ֔עַן אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֲנִ֛י נֹתֵ֥ן לָכֶ֖ם לַֽאֲחֻזָּ֑ה וְנָֽתַתִּי֙ נֶ֣גַע צָרַ֔עַת בְּבֵ֖ית אֶ֥רֶץ אֲחֻזַּתְכֶֽם. (לה) וּבָא֙ אֲשֶׁר־ל֣וֹ הַבַּ֔יִת וְהִגִּ֥יד לַכֹּהֵ֖ן לֵאמֹ֑ר כְּנֶ֕גַע נִרְאָ֥ה לִ֖י בַּבָּֽיִת. (לו) וְצִוָּ֨ה הַכֹּהֵ֜ן וּפִנּ֣וּ אֶת־הַבַּ֗יִת בְּטֶ֨רֶם יָבֹ֤א הַכֹּהֵן֙ לִרְא֣וֹת אֶת־הַנֶּ֔גַע וְלֹ֥א יִטְמָ֖א כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֣ר בַּבָּ֑יִת וְאַ֥חַר כֵּ֛ן יָבֹ֥א הַכֹּהֵ֖ן לִרְא֥וֹת אֶת־הַבָּֽיִת. 

רש"י:

(לד) ונתתי נגע צרעת. בשורה היא להם שהנגעים באים עליהם, לפי שהטמינו אמוריים מטמוניות של זהב בקירות בתיהם כל ארבעים שנה שהיו ישראל במדבר ועל ידי הנגע נותץ הבית ומוצאן.

(לה) כנגע נראה לי בבית. שאפלו הוא חכם ויודע שהוא נגע ודאי, לא יפסק דבר ברור לומר "נגע נראה לי" אלא "כנגע נראה לי". 

(לו) בטרם יבא הכהן וגו'. שכל זמן שאין כהן נזקק לו אין שם תורת טמאה.

ולא יטמא כל־אשר בבית. שאם לא יפנהו ויבא הכהן ויראה הנגע נזקק להסגר וכל מה שבתוכו יטמא. ועל מה חסה תורה? אם על כלי שטף, יטבילם ויטהרו, ואם על אכלין ומשקין, יאכלם בימי טמאתו, הא לא חסה תורה אלא על כלי חרס שאין להם טהרה במקוה. 

****************************

מס' ערכין טז.

ופנו את הבית, א"ר שמואל בר נחמני א"ר יונתן על שבעה דברים נגעים באים וכו' ועל הגזל דכתיב וצוה הכהן ופנו את הבית. תנא, הוא כונס ממון שאינו שלו יבא הכהן ויפזר ממונו.

ספורנו

ופנו את הבית בטרם יבא. ולא יבא קודם לכן, ובין כך יהיה זמן תשובה ותפלה לבעלים, וזמן תפלה לכהן, ועם זה נתן זמן הסגר.

*****************************

רמב"ם הלכות טומאת צרעת

הצרעת הוא שם האמור בשותפות, כולל ענינים הרבה שאין דומין זה לזה, שהרי לובן עור האדם קרוי צרעת, ונפילת מקצתא שער הראש או הזקן נקראב צרעת, ושינוי עין הבגדים או הבתים קרוי צרעת. וזה השינוי האמור בבגדים ובבתים שקראה אותו תורה צרעת בשותפות השם, אינו ממנהגו של עולם, אלא אות ופלא היה בישראל, כדי להזהירם מלשון הרע:

שהמספר בלשון הרע, משתנות קירות ביתו. אם חזר בו, יטהר הבית, ואם עמד ברשעו עד שהותץ הבית, משתנין כלי העור שבביתו שהוא יושב ושוכב עליהן. אם חזר בו, יטהרו, ואם עמד ברשעו עד שיישרפו, משתנין הבגדים שעליו. אם חזר בו, יטהרו, ואם עמד ברשעו עד שיישרפו, משתנה עורו ויצטרע, ויהיה מובדל ומפורסם לבדוו, עד שלא יתעסק בשיחת רשעים שהיא הליצותז ולשון הרע:

ועל ענין זה הואח מזהיר בתורה ואומר "השמר בנגע הצרעת וכו'ט זכור את אשר עשה י"י אלהיך למרים בדרך" וכו' (דברים כ"ד:ח'-ט'), הרי הוא אומר, התבוננו מה אירע למרים הנביאה, שדיברה באחיה שהיאי גדולה ממנו בשנים וגידלה אותויא על ברכיה, וסיכנה בעצמה להצילו מן הים, והיא לא דיברה בגנותו, אלא טעת שהשות אותו לשאר נביאיםיב, והוא לא היה מקפידיג על כל אלו הדבריםיד, שנאמר "והאיש משה ענו מאד" (במדבר י"ב:ג'), ואף על פי כן מיד נענשה בצרעת:

קל וחומר לבני האדם הרשעים הטיפשים, שמרבין לדבר גדולות ונפלאות. לפיכך ראוי למי שרצה לכוון אורחיו, להתרחק מישיבתן ומלדבר עמהם, כדי שלא ייתפס אדם ברשת רשעים וסכלותם:

וזה הוא דרך ישיבת הלצים הרשעים, בתחילה מרבין בדבריכא הבאי, כענין שנאמר "וקול כסיל ברוב דברים" (קהלת ה':ב'), ומתוך כך באין לספר בגנות הצדיקים, כענין שנאמר "תאלמנה שפתי שקר הדוברות על צדיק עתק" (תהלים ל"א:י"ט), ומתוך כך יהיה להם הרגל לדבר בנביאים וליתן דופי בדבריהם, כענין שנאמר "ויהיו מלעיבים במלאכי האלהים ובוזים דבריוכג ומתעתעים בנביאיו" (דברי הימים ב' ל"ו:ט"ז), ומתוך כך באין לדבר באלהים וכופרין בעיקר, כענין שנאמר "ויחפאו בני ישראל דברים אשר לא כן על י"י אלהיהם" (מלכים ב' י"ז:ט'):

והרי הוא אומר בהם "שתו בשמים פיהם ולשונם תהלך בארץ" (תהלים ע"ג:ט'), מי גרם להם לשית בשמים פיהם, לשונם שהלכה תחילה בארץ. זו היא שיחת הרשעים שגורמת להכה ישיבת קרנות, וישיבת כנסיות של עמי הארץ, וישיבת בתי משתאות עם שותי שיכר:

אבל שיחת כשרי ישראל וצדיקיהם אינה אלא בדברי תורה ודברי חכמה, לפיכך הקדוש ברוך הוא עוזר על ידם ומזכה אותם בה, שנאמר "אז נדברו יראי י"י איש אל רעהו ויקשב י"י" וכו' (מלאכי ג':ט"ז):