הִ֠נֵּה יָ֤רְדָה אֵשׁ֙ מִן־הַשָּׁמַ֔יִם וַ֠תֹּאכַל אֶת־שְׁנֵ֞י שָׂרֵ֧י הַחֲמִשִּׁ֛ים הָרִאשֹׁנִ֖ים וְאֶת־חֲמִשֵּׁיהֶ֑ם וְעַתָּ֕ה תִּיקַ֥ר נַפְשִׁ֖י בְּעֵינֶֽיךָ׃ (ס)
Es ist ja ein Feuer vom Himmel herabgefahren und hat verzehrt die zwei früheren Obersten der Fünfzig mit ihren Mannschaften; nun möge doch mein Leben dir wert erscheinen.
Ramban
AND THE PRIEST SHALL LOOK AT HIM ON THE SEVENTH DAY, AND BEHOLD, IF THE PLAGUE STAY ‘B’EINAV.’ “This means in its original color and size.”85The literal meaning of b’einav is “in his eyes,” i.e., the eyes of the priest examining the plague. Ramban will further on stress this literal meaning of the word. This is Rashi’s language. Similarly, ‘v’eino’ (and the appearance thereof) was as the appearance of bdellium;86Numbers 11:7. and so also, ‘k’ein’ (like the color of) the crystal ice.87Ezekiel 1:22. These two verses bear out Rashi’s interpretation of einav as meaning “its appearance,” thus making the sense of the verse to be: and, behold, if the plague stay ‘in its appearance.’
But in the Torath Kohanim we have been taught as follows:88Further, Verse 37. Thus if after having shut the person up in a house for seven days, the priest is in doubt whether the plague has spread [in which case he would pronounce it at once as a genuine case of leprosy], but his son or pupil who saw it at the beginning says definitely that the affliction did not spread, the priest may follow their opinion and may shut him up for another seven days. See my Hebrew commentary p. 70, for further discussion of this point. “[From the expression here] I know only that the plague so appeared [i.e., in its original size] in his own [i.e., the priest’s] eyes. Whence do I know that the same law applies if it so appeared in the eyes of his pupil? Scripture therefore says [in Verse 37]. But if the scall stay ‘b’einav.’” Now if so, the meaning of the verse here would be: “and if the plague is at a stay in the sight of the aforementioned priest,” namely that it has remained as it was, neither having changed its place nor having spread in the skin, wheresoever the priest looks [then he shall shut him up for another seven days]. The usage [of the term a’yin (eye)] is often found in the words of the Sages.89The term chachamim (Sages) is evidently used by Ramban here not in the strict sense of the term, as referring to the Sages of the Talmud, as I have not found this expression in Talmudic literature. It must then be a reference to the later scholars in whose writings this expression abounds. Thus: “So it appears in my eyes.” So also you find [in Scripture]: O man of G-d, I pray thee, let my life be precious ‘b’einecha’ (in thy sight],90II Kings 1:14. meaning, in your opinion and thought. Thus the verse here alludes to the principle that the priest in examining whether the plague has extended in the skin need only judge it as he sees it, but it is not necessary that [he base his decision] upon measuring the plague.
But in the Torath Kohanim we have been taught as follows:88Further, Verse 37. Thus if after having shut the person up in a house for seven days, the priest is in doubt whether the plague has spread [in which case he would pronounce it at once as a genuine case of leprosy], but his son or pupil who saw it at the beginning says definitely that the affliction did not spread, the priest may follow their opinion and may shut him up for another seven days. See my Hebrew commentary p. 70, for further discussion of this point. “[From the expression here] I know only that the plague so appeared [i.e., in its original size] in his own [i.e., the priest’s] eyes. Whence do I know that the same law applies if it so appeared in the eyes of his pupil? Scripture therefore says [in Verse 37]. But if the scall stay ‘b’einav.’” Now if so, the meaning of the verse here would be: “and if the plague is at a stay in the sight of the aforementioned priest,” namely that it has remained as it was, neither having changed its place nor having spread in the skin, wheresoever the priest looks [then he shall shut him up for another seven days]. The usage [of the term a’yin (eye)] is often found in the words of the Sages.89The term chachamim (Sages) is evidently used by Ramban here not in the strict sense of the term, as referring to the Sages of the Talmud, as I have not found this expression in Talmudic literature. It must then be a reference to the later scholars in whose writings this expression abounds. Thus: “So it appears in my eyes.” So also you find [in Scripture]: O man of G-d, I pray thee, let my life be precious ‘b’einecha’ (in thy sight],90II Kings 1:14. meaning, in your opinion and thought. Thus the verse here alludes to the principle that the priest in examining whether the plague has extended in the skin need only judge it as he sees it, but it is not necessary that [he base his decision] upon measuring the plague.