Comentario sobre Números 19:16

על פני השדה [AND EVERYTHING WHICH TOUCHES] ON THE OPEN FIELD — Our Rabbis explained that this is intended to include the upper board and the side board of a coffin (which were on the surface of the field — that these, too, render a person unclean) (Chullin 72a). The literal meaning of the words על פני השדה is, however, that even where there is no אהל, covering, there too, the dead body may cause uncleanness, but only by contact with it.

AND WHOSOEVER TOUCHETH IN THE OPEN FIELD. “Our Rabbis have said that this includes the upper board and the side board [of a coffin, when found in the open field]. And the plain meaning [of the verse] is: in the open field where there are no tents, a corpse conveys uncleanness [only] by contact.” This is Rashi’s language. But in the opinion of the Sages³⁵The reference here is to Rabbi Yishmael, whose opinion on this matter is, according to Ramban, the accepted decision of the law. Rashi’s comment, however, follows the opinion of Rabbi Akiba (Chullin 72a) who does derive the principle of the upper board and the side board of the coffin from the verse before us (Mizrachi). the [law that the] upper and side boards of the coffin [convey uncleanness] is not derived from Scripture, but is a tradition [handed down by Moses who received it at Sinai]. Therefore a Nazirite [who has become impure by coming into contact with them] is not subject to [the law of] shaving his hair,³⁶See above, 6:9. In other words, since this impurity is not derived from a Scriptural verse, although it is in fact a law of the Torah and not merely of the Rabbis, the Nazirite is not considered as having defiled himself to the extent that he must start his period as a Nazir anew. and likewise [one who becomes impure through contact with them] is not liable to punishment for defiling the Sanctuary [by entering it when impure] or [by eating] the hallowed offerings [in such a state of uncleanness]. Rather, [the expression] in the open field is to be understood according to our Rabbis in its literal sense, i.e., that he touches a person who is slain by the sword, who has fallen in the open field, and there is nothing covering over the corpse. And since this verse is now [seemingly] superfluous, [since it has already been stated in Verse 11 above that one who touches a corpse becomes impure], the Rabbis derived from it the following interpretation, and they said in Tractate Nazir in the Chapter “The High Priest:”³⁷Nazir 53b. “And whosoever toucheth in the open field. This refers to one who ‘covers over’ a corpse” [and tells us that he becomes impure], since by covering over it he “touches” the open field. [According to this interpretation of the Rabbis the expression] bachalal cherev (slain by the sword) is lacking the [connective letter] vav — u’bachalal cherev, [meaning: “or slain by the sword”].³⁸Thus according to the interpretation of the Rabbis, two separate principles are enunciated in this verse: 1) and whosoever ‘touches’ upon the face of the field, i.e., who leans over a corpse or covers it with his body, because in doing so he “touches” the corpse; 2) or whosoever touches directly one slain by the sword. And since Scripture says ‘pnei’ hasadeh [literally: “the face” of the field] and does not [just] say “the field”, Rabbi Yishmael further interpreted it³⁹Chullin 72a. to exclude the [case of a] foetus which died whilst still in its mother’s womb [so that if the midwife put her hand inside the mother and touched it, she does not become impure], because it is impurity which is “swallowed up,” and is not “upon the face” of the place.
Scripture states slain ‘by the sword’ because it speaks of the usual [way of events], but the same law applies if the person was slain by a stone or fist. It mentions those killed and those who die [naturally, stating: one that is slain by the sword, or one that dieth of himself] in contrast to animals for [those animals, which are permitted as food] are pure if they are slaughtered properly, but if they die of their own accord [or were not slaughtered properly] convey impurity as carrion; whereas all human corpses convey impurity, regardless of how the person met his death]. Since it appears superfluous, however, our Rabbis interpreted it in the following manner, namely [that the expression one that is slain by the sword is intended to teach us] that the sword [with which the person was slain] is exactly like the slain person himself, and the whole purpose of the verse is to equate the slain and the sword, so as to say that it [the sword] becomes an avi avoth hatumah (a progenitor of a primary source of impurity),⁴⁰In the process of conveying impurity from one source to another, the general rule is always that the defilement of the recipient is of a lesser degree than that of the conveyor. But here in the case of a dead body there is a point of novelty. Since the corpse itself is considered an ‘avi’ avoth hatumah (a progenitor of a primary source of impurity) the sword which touched him should have become only an av hatumah (a primary source of impurity), while the rule is that it becomes an avi avoth hatumah just like the dead itself. Hence a person that touches the sword which was so defiled becomes an av hatumah (a primary source of impurity), and not a rishon l’tumah (a first degree of impurity) as would be the ordinary rule. See further on these laws in Vol. III, p. 148, Note 252. It should also be pointed out [for the sake of the following text of Ramban] that the above principle of the sword [becoming an avi avoth hatumah just as the corpse] applies also to all metal vessels which have been rendered impure by a corpse. just like the dead person himself, and it conveys impurity of seven days’ duration to people and vessels. It appears from the text of the Mishnah and Gemara⁴¹See Ramban in his commentary to Baba Bathra 20a where he discusses at length these “texts of the Mishnah and Gemara” which corroborate his opinion. It is of interest to note that Ramban cites there also the varying opinion of Rabbeinu Tam [the outstanding authority among the masters of the Tosafoth] who holds that the sword is equated entirely to a corpse, even in regard to the impurity of ohel (see Note 32 above). — For the term Gemara see in Vol. II p. 132, Note 204. that it [the sword and all metal vessels] convey impurity by contact and through carrying just like the corpse, but it is unlike the corpse in [that it does not] convey impurity by ohel³²Literally: “a tent.” This refers to the law that anything “spread over” an unclean object has the same effect as “a tent.” Hence if a tree shaded a corpse, the law of a dead body in a house or tent applies. [i.e., if it is in a tent or building together with a person or object, that person or object remains pure]. Perhaps the Rabbis based this exclusion on the verse dealing with the tent, which says: when ‘a man’ dieth in a tent,⁴²Verse 14. [thus implying that the law of “the tent,” i.e., that of conveying impurity by ohel], applies only to the dead body itself. And if a sword [or metal vessel] which became impure by [touching] a corpse were to convey impurity of ohel, the priests would be forbidden to enter all buildings [even after the removal of the corpse], for they all have a “sword” [i.e., some metal vessel]⁴³See Note 40 above. which has become impure, and it would defile them by ohel³²Literally: “a tent.” This refers to the law that anything “spread over” an unclean object has the same effect as “a tent.” Hence if a tree shaded a corpse, the law of a dead body in a house or tent applies. [and it is obviously impossible to say that priests may never enter all buildings]!⁴⁴This problem was proposed by Rabbeinu Chayim Hakohen to Rabbeinu Tam: “If so, what house would you build for them [the priests], and what place may be their resting place?” (see my Hebrew commentary p. 270). It further appears in the Gemara⁴⁵Nazir 54b. See my Hebrew commentary p. 270. that a sword [or metal vessel] which touches a corpse does not render a person [who touches it] impure to the extent that he requires to be sprinkled [with the waters of purification] on the third and seventh days,⁴⁶Verse 12. even though the person who touches [the sword or vessel] becomes a “father of impurity.” This is because in the second verse where He states and he shall sprinkle upon the tent⁴⁷Verse 18. The fact, that in this verse which speaks of the sprinkling of the waters of purification upon the impure, it does not mention that he became defiled by having touched “one that is slain with a sword,” indicates that he is rendered impure for a seven days’ duration, yet he does not require the sprinkling of the waters mentioned. it says, and upon him that touched the bone, or ‘the slain,’ or the dead or the grave,⁴⁷Verse 18. The fact, that in this verse which speaks of the sprinkling of the waters of purification upon the impure, it does not mention that he became defiled by having touched “one that is slain with a sword,” indicates that he is rendered impure for a seven days’ duration, yet he does not require the sprinkling of the waters mentioned. but it does not say “or one that is slain with a sword.” If so, the sword [and all metal vessels] are like the corpse [in degree of impurity] only to the extent that one who touches it is rendered impure for seven days’ duration, but not [to the extent that a sword conveys impurity] by ohel³²Literally: “a tent.” This refers to the law that anything “spread over” an unclean object has the same effect as “a tent.” Hence if a tree shaded a corpse, the law of a dead body in a house or tent applies. [as does a corpse], nor [to the extent that one who touches it] requires sprinkling [of the waters of purification]. Likewise a Nazirite does not have to cut off his hair [on account of being in a tent together with it], nor is there any prohibition at all against a priest touching it [whereas he is prohibited from touching the corpse itself.]⁴⁸Leviticus 21:1. This is the most likely and reasonable explanation, based on the words of our Rabbis. But we because of our sins are now impure in the exile, and we do not know of the purity of holiness until the spirit be poured upon us from on High,⁴⁹Isaiah 32:15. and G-d will sprinkle clean water upon us⁵⁰Ezekiel 36:25. and we shall become pure. Amen, and may this be the will [of G-d] speedily in our days.

וכל אשר יגע על פני השדה, if one enters a closed area, roofed area in which the remains of the deceased are present one becomes ritually unclean, whereas if the remains of the deceased are in an open area such as a field, only direct contact with the deceased confers such ritual impurity.