출애굽기 28:4의 인용 해설

And this is the thing: Rabbi Anani bar Sasson said, "Why was the section about the sacrifices juxtaposed to the section about the garments of the priesthood? To tell you, just like the sacrifices atone, so too do the garments of the priesthood atone."⁴Rashi explained, Why in Parshat Tzav was, "This is the law of the burnt-offering, etc.," juxtaposed to what it goes to, "Take Aharon [etc.] and the garments." To here are his [words]. But in Arakhin 15a, it explains that the intention is about this section, which is the section of the inauguration, and it is juxtaposed to the section of the garments earlier. And it seems like the main approach is like the explanation in Arakhin. For the main section about the priestly garments is here. And I have also carefully noted in several place that when the Sages, may their memory be blessed, said, "Why was this section juxtaposed to that section," they always first took the passage that is written later in the Torah. For example, in Berakhot 10a, "Why was the section about Avshalom juxtaposed to the section about Gog and Magog (Psalms 2,3)?" And behold that the section of Avshalom is written after the section of Gog and Magog... And likewise in Moed Katan 28a, "Why was the the death of Miriam juxtaposed to the section about the heiffer?"... In all of them, they are arranged that the later is placed first. And here too, if it was like Rashi wrote here, that it is intending Parsaht Tzav, in which it is written, "This is the law of the burnt-offering," and then, "Take Aharon [etc.] and the garments," it should have said, "Why is the section about the garments of the priesthood juxtaposed to the section of the sacrifices." Examine this and you will find it simple.
And the simple understanding of the matter indicates that the garments of the priesthood themselves atone. But according to that, there is a need to investigate Rashi in Yoma 72b at the top, in his explanation of, "Were it not for the garments of the priesthood, nothing would have remained of [the Jewish people], etc." He wrote: Were it not for the garments of the priesthood, with which they would offer sacrifices that atone for the Jewish people. To here are his [words]. But why did he not explain more simply that the garments of the priesthood themselves atone, like the simple reading here? And it must be said that he holds that the garments only atone then when they are doing the holy service with them, the enactment of the sacrifices; and not with their being worn itself. The tunic atoned for the spilling of blood, as it is stated (Parsaht Vayeshev, Genesis 37:31), "and they slaughtered a goat, and immersed the coat in the blood."⁵This is a hint to the future when the atonement for the spilling of blood would be with the tunic of the garments of the priesthood. And immersion means atonement. And it is explained in the Gemara that this atonement is only with a murderer that is impossible to judge, such as if they did not warn him. But a murderer who is liable for death is not atoned towards the congregation so long as they have not judged him, as it is written (at the end of Parshat Maasei, "and for the land there can be no atonement for the blood that was spilled in it, except through the blood of the one who spilled it." And see what I have written at the beginning of Parshat Haazinu on the verse, "Let my instruction flow like rainfall" (Deuteronomy 32:2). But in the Yerushalmi, Yoma7:3, it is found that the tunic atones for those who have worn forbidden mixtures. And so is it in the Midrash Rabbah, Parshat Tzav; and Shir HaShirim [Rabbah] 4:7. However the reason of this thing, [that] the tunic atones for those who have worn forbidden mixtures, is not explained. And in the glosses of the Radal (R. David Luria) on the Midrash Rabbah, Parshat Tzav, he writes there it is because the tunic consisted of forbidden mixtures. And it is a great wonder about such an unusual genius as he, that he erred about something well known and simple: For in all of the garments of the priesthood, only the belt, the breastplate and the apron were [from forbidden mixtures;] (unless we say it was a copier's mistake in his words, and it should say, because the tunic did not consist of forbidden mixtures. Meaning that since there were no forbidden mixtures in it, that is why it atones for the iniquity of forbidden mixtures. However according to this, it is not clear why specifically the tunic, and not the other garments of the priesthood that did not have forbidden mixtures? And that requires investigation.) And I wonder about that which the Maharil wrote (Laws of Yom Kippur 3:2), that the custom in Mainz on Yom Kippur is not to recite the penitential prayer, "But we are guilty," because it has fixed in it that the tunic of the high priest would atone for the iniquity of forbidden mixtures. And the Ravah (R. Wolf Heidenheim) explained his words: It is because this is against the opinion of the Sages, may their memory be blessed, in Zevachim 88b, that the tunic atones for the spilling of blood; and not as it is written in the formula of [this] prayer, that it atones for the iniquity of forbidden mixtures. To here are his [words]. And this is a wonderous thing! For behold this opinion is explicitly expressed in the Yerushalmi and in two places in the Midrash Rabbah! And that which the writer of the penitential prayer chose this opinion against that which is expressed in the Babylonian Talmud (and in general, we hold that the Babylonian Talmud is the main one) - that is nothing new with the liturgical poets. And the Tosafot in Chagigah 13a already wrote that the liturgical poets are accustomed in several places to put aside the the position of the Babylonian Talmud and to grasp on to the Yerushalmi. And see Tosafot on Chullin 109b, and these are their [words]: And [the liturgical poet] did everything according to the Yerushalmi. To here are their [words]. And the same is true here. However there is certainly no reason and logic at all to prevent the saying of the penitential prayer on account of this. And the pants atone for sexual prohibitions, as it is stated (Exodus 28:42), "Make for them linen pants to cover the nakedness of their flesh." The turban atones for those who are haughty, let something high come and atone for haughtiness. The belt atones for the thoughts of the heart, where it is.⁶As they would tie it across from the underarms, meaning across from the heart. And see Tosafot on Arakhin 15b. The breastplate atones for [incorrect] judgments, as it is stated (Exodus 28:15), "And you shall make a breastplate of judgment." The apron atones for idol worship, as it is stated (Hosea 3:4), "and without breastplate or oracle idols."⁷Rashi explained: When there is no apron, there is the iniquity of oracle idols. To here are his [words]. And I did not know where he found a hint to expound like this. And is not the simple understanding that there is no apron and also no oracle idols? And maybe he found a hint in the rest of the wording of that verse, "without a king, without officials, without sacrifice, without cult pillars and without an apron and oracle idols." And behold in every detail, it attached the word, without (ein), even though it could have written, "without king, or officials, without sacrifice or cult pillars." But since it wrote, "without," for each detail; and it only left out writing, "without," with the oracle gods; that is why he expounded, "without an apron (meaning, when there is no apron), there are oracle idols.The robe atones for evil speech. Let something with noise (kol) come and atone for an evil noise.⁸"Let something with noise come," means the bells in the robe, which give off a noise. And that which it describes evil speech with the word, noise, even though it is possible to also be muted - is because we learn the main matter of evil speech from the verse in Proverbs (27:14), "He who greets his fellow loudly," as it is explained in the discussion in Arakhin 16a. Indeed, it is the incense that actually atones for muted evil speech, as will be explained ahead in Parashat Korach, on the verse (Number 17:12), "and he put on incense and atoned for the people." And they said [about this], "Let something that is muted come (since the incense is done in a muted way, as it is written about this, 'No man shall be present in the Tent of Meeting'), and atone for something muted." See there ahead. And the frontplate of the High Priest atones for brazenness. With the frontplate, it is written (Exodus 28:38), "And it shall be upon Aaron’s forehead"; and with brazenness it is written (Jeremiah 3:3), "and you had a harlot’s forehead."⁹And the end of the verse is, "you refused to be ashamed." And it is the way of the brazen not to be ashamed. And see the Yerushalmi, Yoma 7:3; and in the Midrash Rabbah on Shir HaShirim 4 - there are different variants about this homily. (Zevachim 88b)

“And the priest shall put on his linen garment, etc.” Ramban explained that the removal of the ashes requires priestly garments, and no service can be performed with only two garments. Nevertheless, the text specifies these garments to introduce a new requirement: that the tunic should be of his exact measure, and that nothing should interpose between the breeches and his flesh. This explanation is difficult, however, because why would these new requirements be specified here? They should have been written in the portion of Tetzaveh, since that is where the text discusses the preparation of the priestly garments.

ועשה לו כתונת פסים, “he made for him a striped coat.” This was a superior garment.. It may have resembled the כתונת תשבץ worn by the High Priest (Exodus 28,4). The brothers were envious of Joseph on account of this garment. This envy aroused by Yaakov making this garment for Joseph caused our sages (Shabbat 10) to go on record that a father should be careful not to discriminate between his children.
This coat was the first of the various causes which produced the tragedy described by the Torah and whose ramifications ultimately resulted in the enslavement of the bodies of the Jewish people in Egypt. It had still later ramifications in the time of the Romans after the destruction of the second Temple when ten of the most illustrious scholars of that time died a martyr’s death at the hands of the Romans whose Emperor justified himself quoting the penalty of kidnapping provided in the Torah. He argued that the brothers had never been punished for selling their brother. The body is perceived as the outer garment of the soul. The kind of garment one wears is somehow related to the body underneath it just as the body is related to the soul within it.
According to Bereshit Rabbah 84,6 the expression פסים (plural) is used because these stripes were as wide as two פסות ידיו, two handbreadths. Another interpretation of the word פסים: the word is derived from פייס, lot; the brothers drew lots amongst themselves to decide which of the four methods of death the Torah provides to administer to Joseph. This is based on the wording of ויתנכלו להמיתו, “they planned (how) to kill him” (verse 37,18). Alternately, they drew lots who was to bring the news about the torn coat to their father Yaakov. The lot fell on Yehudah and this is why Yehudah said to Yaakov הכר נא ”please identify if this is the coat of your son.” The expression הכר נא is found again with Tamar, Yehudah’s daughter-in-law, who said to Yehudah concerning the pawn he had given her הכר נא למי החותמת וגו', “please identify to whom this signet ring belongs, etc.” (38,25) When Yehudah said to Yaakov: “identify if this is the coat of your son,” Yaakov’s life ended suddenly, and the lives of Yehudah’s sons Er and Onan came to an end at that same moment. [I believe that this Midrash considers the “revival” of Yaakov as having taken place when he heard that Joseph was alive, 45,24, and that the lives of Er and Onan were vicariously revived in the twin sons which Tamar bore for Yehudah 38,28. Ed.] This is the mystical dimension of Jeremiah 32,18 ומשלם עון אבות אל חיק בניהם אחריהם, “but You visit the guilt of the fathers to their children after them.”
Still another possible meaning of the word פסים. The word is reminiscent of the four kinds of troubles which befell Joseph as a result of this coat. The letters in the word are an acrostic for the words פוטיפר, סוחרים, ישמעאלים, מדינים.. All the above owned Joseph at one time or another from the moment the brothers sold him. A more mystical meaning of the word פסים: Yaakov revealed the mystical connections between the 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet to Joseph. In other words, Yaakov “enrobed” his son Joseph with the wisdom contained in the twenty-two letters of the alphabet which he himself had learned at the time he had studied in the academies of Shem and Ever.

I am gripped with convulsions. I am gripped with convulsions.⁴This is Targum Yonasan’s translation. The Midrash Aggadah⁵Tanchuma Metzoro 2. explains that this⁶Shaul’s death in this manner was retribution for that sin. occurred because of Shaul's sin of killing the Kohanim⁷Of the city of Nov, see Shmuel 1,22:18. as it is written concerning them,⁸The Kohanim in general. "a checkered shirt."⁹Shemot, 28:4 lists the כתנת תשבץ as one of the garments worn by the Kohanim. Both the word תַּשְׁבֵּץ there and the word הַשָּׁבָץ here share the same three letters, ש־ב־ץ.