Komentarz do Kapłańska 14:6
אֶת־הַצִּפֹּ֤ר הַֽחַיָּה֙ יִקַּ֣ח אֹתָ֔הּ וְאֶת־עֵ֥ץ הָאֶ֛רֶז וְאֶת־שְׁנִ֥י הַתּוֹלַ֖עַת וְאֶת־הָאֵזֹ֑ב וְטָבַ֨ל אוֹתָ֜ם וְאֵ֣ת ׀ הַצִּפֹּ֣ר הַֽחַיָּ֗ה בְּדַם֙ הַצִּפֹּ֣ר הַשְּׁחֻטָ֔ה עַ֖ל הַמַּ֥יִם הַֽחַיִּֽים׃
Ptaka tedy żywego weźmie i drzewo cedrowe i czerwień, i izop, a zamoczy to wraz z ptakiem żywym we krwi ptaka zarzniętego nad wodą żywą,
Rashi on Leviticus
את הצפור החיה יקח אתה AS FOR THE LIVING BIRD HE SHALL TAKE IT — The phrasing (since it does not state ‘‘the living bird and the cedar wood etc. he shall take”, but, “the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar stick etc.”) informs us that he does not bind it (the bird) together with them (the cedar wood etc.) but keeps it apart by itself. The cedar stick, however, and the hyssop are tied together by the crimson slip, just as it is stated: “and the cedar wood and the crimson slip and the hyssop” — one “taking” for the three (since these three are grouped together after the word יקח). One might think that just as it (the bird) does not come under the regulation as regards binding, so, too, it does not come under the regulation as regards “dipping”; it therefore states “and he shall dip them and the living bird” — thus it (Scripture) mentions the bird again in connection with them to bring it, too, under the regulation of dipping (cf. Sifra, Metzora, Chapter 1 6).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Siftei Chakhamim
That he does not tie it with them. Rashi is answering the question: It should say “taking” once on all of them: “The [living] bird... [and the cedarwood, the crimson thread] and the hyssop he shall take them.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Chizkuni
ואת הצפור החיה בדם, “together with the living bird in the blood of;” this was so that the living bird before being released had been dyed the colour of the slaughtered bird’s blood; the other birds of the same subspecies will look at it and will know that it had changed colours (allegorically speaking had become impure) and gang up on it and kill it so that they themselves will not be found as afflicted with the disease of the now healed victim. They are afraid of being chosen as sacrifices for another person afflicted with the same disease. (This strange sounding paragraph is found inTossaphot. The idea of releasing a living bird in order that it be killed by its mates sounds somewhat puzzling.) Seeing that the Torah in verse 20 writes that this whole procedure as outlined in the verses following, is designed to achieve atonement עליו, i.e. only for the person of which we have been reading, if the bird that had been released would return, the affliction would also return and the person who had brought all these sacrifices would not have become ritually pure. If proof would be needed that this statement is indeed correct, i.e. that the mates of that bird that has changed colour by having been dunked in blood will kill it or devour it, our sages quote Jeremiah 12,9 as saying in the name of G-d: העיט צבוע נחלתי לי התיו לאכלה, “My heritage has become like a speckled bird, the birds around it are against her ready to devour her!” this simile appears completely inappropriate as the Torah had never spoken about an עיט, “a speckled bird.” It must therefore be a bird which because it had changed colour, cannot be recognised for what it had been like originally. The Talmud argues that surely the Torah would not have instructed this live bird to be released if the intention had been that it should be killed! (Talmud, tractate Kidushin folio 57) [Remember that we had learned that any bird referred to as צפור is automatically permitted to become an instrument to lead someone into sin, especially a bird that is permitted to be eaten, so how did Jeremiah quote G-d as saying that it has become a forbidden bird, עיט. Ed.]
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Siftei Chakhamim
Are wrapped together in the [crimson] strip. I.e., the cedarwood and hyssop, and also the crimson strip are wrapped together in a bundle, but the crimson strip is not wrapped around the [other] two. Rather, it was wrapped with them in a bundle with the remnants of the strip.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Siftei Chakhamim
It is not included in the [requirement] of dipping. It appears to me that we should not explain that [Rashi means] it would not be included at all in [the requirement of] dipping, because Scripture writes: “and the live bird in the blood of the slaughtered bird.” Rather, it appears to me that this is what he means: Perhaps, just as it is not included in [the requirement of] tying together, but rather is taken by itself, so too it is not included in [the requirement of] dipping with the bundle. Instead, [it would have a] dipping by itself. [Therefore,] the verse says, “and he shall dip them and the live bird” — one dipping for all of them (Nachalas Yaakov).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy