히브리어 성경
히브리어 성경

레위기 13:32의 미드라쉬

וְרָאָ֨ה הַכֹּהֵ֣ן אֶת־הַנֶּגַע֮ בַּיּ֣וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי֒ וְהִנֵּה֙ לֹא־פָשָׂ֣ה הַנֶּ֔תֶק וְלֹא־הָ֥יָה ב֖וֹ שֵׂעָ֣ר צָהֹ֑ב וּמַרְאֵ֣ה הַנֶּ֔תֶק אֵ֥ין עָמֹ֖ק מִן־הָעֽוֹר׃

칠 일만에 제사장은 그 환처를 진찰할지니 그 옴이 퍼지지 아니하고 그 자리에 누른 털이 없고 피부보다 우묵하지 아니하거든

Sifra

1) (Vayikra 13:32) ("And the Cohein shall see the plague-spot on the seventh day, and, behold, if the nethek has not spread, and there was no yellow hair in it, and the appearance of the nethek is not deeper than the skin") "on the seventh": I might think either by day or at night (before the seventh day); it is, therefore, written "on the day," and not at night.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Sifra

2) For I might think that the skin of the flesh, which confers tumah through four "appearances," requires daylight, but nethakim, which do not confer tumah through four appearances, do not require daylight; it must, therefore, be written (also in respect to nethakim) "in the daytime," and not at night.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Sifra

3) R. Yehudah says: Wherever the stipulation of precedence (of nega to hair) must be made, it is made (explicitly, in the verse itself), but nethek, about which it is written (Vayikra 13:32) "and there is no yellow hair in it" (without any explicit stipulation of precedence), (nethek) confers tumah whether or not it precedes (the yellow hair).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Sifra

3) "and, behold, if the nethek has not spread, and there was no yellow hair in it": R. Yehudah says: It does not say "it (the nethek) did not turn the hair yellow in it," but "and there was no yellow hair in it," which implies that if there was yellow hair there (even) before the (advent of the) nethek, it is tamei. R. Yochanan b. Nuri says: It does not say: "There was no thin yellow hair in it," but "there was no yellow hair in it" — even a long one. "and the appearance of the nethek is not deeper than the skin": (its appearance is the determining factor) and not its (actual) substance.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Sifra

4) Why, then, is it written the nega of the nethek? Nethek is being likened to nega. Just as nega does not (confer tumah) with less than a garis, so nethek does not (confer tumah) with less than a garis. And by the repetition of "the nega of the nethek" (Vayikra 13:32), nega is being likened to nethek. Just as there is no "spreading" into a nethek, so there is no "spreading" into a nega. (If there were a michyah in the midst of a bahereth and the bahereth spread into it, it is not called a "spreading" [for purposes of tumah]).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
이전 절전체 장다음 절