פירוש על ויקרא 13:33
Rashi on Leviticus
והתגלח AND HE SHALL CUT HIS HAIR around the scall,
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Ramban on Leviticus
THEN SHALL HE BE SHAVEN, BUT ‘V’ETH HANETHEK’ (THE SCALL) SHALL HE NOT SHAVE. In line with the plain meaning of Scripture the verse warns that he should not use a razor on the place of the nethek, for even though there is no hair on it, yet if he passes the razor over it the skin will be scratched causing hair to grow in it; for such is the nature of people who have scabs on their heads, and all those who make their hair to fall off, to scratch the place on the head and also to make certain cuts in it with a knife.
But in the Torath Kohanim the Sages interpreted the verse as follows:138Torath Kohanim, Negaim 9:7. “But the ‘nethek’ shall he not shave. But what is there to shave there?” That is to say, has not the hair fallen off from it? [So what need is there for Scripture to warn him not to shave it?] “Rather, the verse means, around the nethek he is not to shave. How can we explain this? He shaves the space outside it, but leaves [a circle] of two hairs [width] next to the nethek, so that it should be possible to discern if it spreads.” It is this which Onkelos translated: “and he shall shave around the scall, and that which is within the scall he shall not shave,” for he is to leave on all its sides a row of two hairs in order to recognize [at the end of seven days] if the nethek has spread [in which case the priest will pronounce him impure]. And the meaning of the word v’eth [v’eth hanethek] is then like the expression, and David came near ‘eth’ the people, and he saluted them,139I Samuel 30:21. which means that he came near them but he did not enter into their midst. [Here too it would mean, “and ‘in’ the nethek itself he shall not shave.”] Or it may be that the meaning of v’eth is like im (with), with the word asher (which) missing, the verse thus stating: “and that [i.e., the hair] which is ‘with’ the nethek he shall not shave.” There are many such cases in Scripture.
But in the Torath Kohanim the Sages interpreted the verse as follows:138Torath Kohanim, Negaim 9:7. “But the ‘nethek’ shall he not shave. But what is there to shave there?” That is to say, has not the hair fallen off from it? [So what need is there for Scripture to warn him not to shave it?] “Rather, the verse means, around the nethek he is not to shave. How can we explain this? He shaves the space outside it, but leaves [a circle] of two hairs [width] next to the nethek, so that it should be possible to discern if it spreads.” It is this which Onkelos translated: “and he shall shave around the scall, and that which is within the scall he shall not shave,” for he is to leave on all its sides a row of two hairs in order to recognize [at the end of seven days] if the nethek has spread [in which case the priest will pronounce him impure]. And the meaning of the word v’eth [v’eth hanethek] is then like the expression, and David came near ‘eth’ the people, and he saluted them,139I Samuel 30:21. which means that he came near them but he did not enter into their midst. [Here too it would mean, “and ‘in’ the nethek itself he shall not shave.”] Or it may be that the meaning of v’eth is like im (with), with the word asher (which) missing, the verse thus stating: “and that [i.e., the hair] which is ‘with’ the nethek he shall not shave.” There are many such cases in Scripture.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Tur HaArokh
והתגלח ואת הנתק לו יגלח, “he is to shave himself, but he shall not shave off the netek.”
Nachmanides writes that according to the plain meaning the Torah forbids the afflicted party to allow the razor to touch the afflicted area even though it is not covered with any hair. However, if the razor is allowed to touch that area it will cause injury to the skin that will result in hair growing from such a spot.
However, in Torat Kohanim we find that the wordsואת הנתק are understood to mean “and around the netek,” in line with Rashi’s interpretation that he must leave two hairs unshaven so as to know the extent of the netek. Nachmanides (on verse 29) wrote at length about whether such an irregularity of the skin, not especially defined, results in ritual impurity of the afflicted person.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy