Tafsiran yang Mengutip untuk Yeremia 32:20

Bei den übrigen Opfern. Da das Pesach zu den Opfern gehört, dürfte die Gegenüberstellung von פסח und מוקרשין (hier und M. 12, desgl. 1 הפסח שנתערב בזבחים IX 8, פסח וקדשים VIII 8 u. Ḥullin 12a oben) Befremden erregen. Dem Kundigen fällt es kaum auf. Schon in der heil. Schrift findet man בישראל ובאדם (Jer. 32, 20) u. ä., im Gebetbuch בין ישראל לעמים u. dgl.; im Talmud ist die Verbindung solcher Begriffe, von denen der eine den andern umschliesst, unter Weglassung des Wörtchens שאר fast die Regel. Hier nur wenige Beispiele: את הראש ואת האברים (Joma III 4), בירושלים — בהר הבית (Sch’ḳalim VII 2. Dagegen ebend. בשעת הרגל מעשר ובשאר ימות השנה חולין, ebenso in dem Zitat Babli P’saḥim 7a, umgekehrt aber in Baba M. 26a: בשאר ימות השנה חולין בשעת הרגל מעשר, eine Wortstellung, bei welcher der Zusatz בשאר nöthig ist, weil der umfassendere Begriff vorangeht; vgl. שאר ירקות—מרור P’saḥim X 4), הכהנים והעם (Joma VI 2 u. Ta‘anijot IV, 5) חטאת — קרבנות (Nazir VI 10) u. a. m. Vielleicht gehört hierher auch כתנים לויים וישראלים (Ḳidduschin IV 1) und die stehende Redensart דברי ר׳ פלוני וחכמים אומרים.

אדם כי ימות באהל, “when a person dies in a tent (or house), etc.” although the legislation which follows applies equally to people dying inside a house or other roofed structure, the Torah chose the example of “tent” since at the time the Israelites in the desert lived in tents. Legislation mentioned here is valid both at the time it was written and for all future generations. We learn from here that contamination caused by being in the same enclosed airspace with a corpse results only from the corpse of a Jew as only Jews qualify for the title “אדם.” (compare Ezekiel 34,31 “for you My flock are אדם”). Although there are verses scattered throughout the Bible in which the Gentiles are referred to by the same “title” (Numbers 31,11), the sages have already answered this apparent contradiction in Yevamot 61, namely the word had to be used there in order to distinguish Gentiles from beasts which were also numbered as part of the booty. A similar explanation applies to the verse in Jonah 4,11 where אדם is contrasted with the beasts. In other words, the only time the term אדם is used for Gentiles is when it is in contradistinction to בהמה, beast. We are still faced with the word אדם referring clearly to Gentiles in Psalms 124,2. Megillah 11 explains that in that verse the word אדם means “ordinary human,” not a “king.” Another instance which appears to bestow the title אדם on Gentiles is found in Isaiah 43,4. The Talmud Berachot 62 suggests that the word in Isaiah be read as אדום instead of as אדם, i.e. that the “people” G’d will give as ransom for the Jewish people will be the Edomites. A more problematic text involving the word אדם is Leviticus 18,5 on which Sanhedrin 59 suggests that even a Gentile who studies the laws of sexual chastity and observes them attains the level of purity reserved for the High Priest. It is pointed out that in the relevant verse the word for the Gentile is האדם as distinct from אדם. Whenever the Torah speaks of האדם, Gentiles are not excluded. This leaves us with Jeremiah 32,20: where G’d speaks of miracles performed “before Israelites and אדם,” which appears to imply that both peoples merited the miracles, i.e. were on similar ethical levels. The problem is answered by pointing out that whereas these miracles were beneficial for the Israelites, they were at the same time extremely damaging to the Egyptians who are referred to in that verse as אדם. It is clear therefore that far from equating the Israelites and the אדם, i.e. Egyptians as on a similar moral level the prophet wanted to contrast the levels of Israelites with that of people characterised as אדם.