Komentarz do Kapłańska 14:9

את כל שערו [HE SHALL CUT OFF] ALL HIS HAIR etc. — We have a generalisation (“all his hair”), a particularisation (“his head and his beard and his eyebrows”), and again a generalisation (“and all his hair”). According to the rule of interpretation (מדה ו' י״ג מדות) the purpose of this is to include in the generalisation only such things as are similar to those contained in the particularisation; here it intends to include every spot of the body where there is a collection of hair, it (the hair) being visible (these being the characteristics of the head, beard and eyebrows) (Sotah 16a).

AND IT SHALL BE ON THE SEVENTH DAY, THAT HE SHALL SHAVE ALL HIS HAIR, HIS HEAD AND HIS BEARD AND HIS EYEBROWS, EVEN ALL HIS HAIR HE SHALL SHAVE OFF. “This is a general principle [he shall shave all his head] followed by an enumeration of particulars [already comprehended in the general proposition, i.e., his head etc.] and [this again is followed by] a generalization [all his hair he shall shave off].⁶⁴Such a Scriptural statement is governed by the rule enunciated by Rabbi Yishmael [in his “Thirteen exegetical principles by which the Torah is expounded”], that the generalizations can include only such new particulars as are similar to those particulars specified. In the verse they therefore include etc. This is to include every spot of the body where there is a visible collection of hair” [just like the head, beard and eyebrows]. This is Rashi’s language.
But in the Torath Kohanim it is stated:⁶⁵Torath Kohanim, Metzora 2:2-3. Ramban’s meaning is to point out that Rashi here follows Rabbi Yishmael’s method of exposition, while the accepted rule is that of Rabbi Akiba, who had a different method of exegesis which allowed in such cases for a wider inclusion of particulars not specified, as indicated in the following text of the Torath Kohanim. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 80. “And he shall shave off all his hair. I might think this includes the hidden parts of the body; Scripture therefore states, his eyebrows. Just as the eyebrows are visible, so also [the expression] all his hair refers only to visible parts of the body, thus excluding hair which is in the hidden parts of the body. If so I might think, just as the eyebrows are in a place where there is a visible collection of hair, so we are to include [only] those places where there is a visible collection of hair. Whence do I know to include [in the commandment of shaving his hair] an invisible collection of hair [such as under the armpits, and between the legs], or a visible scattering of hair [such as on the stomach or ribs] or an invisible scattering of hair [such as the hair in the folds of the body]? Scripture therefore says, even all his hair he shall shave off.” However, the Rabbi [Rashi] followed the interpretation of Rabbi Yishmael,⁶⁴Such a Scriptural statement is governed by the rule enunciated by Rabbi Yishmael [in his “Thirteen exegetical principles by which the Torah is expounded”], that the generalizations can include only such new particulars as are similar to those particulars specified. In the verse they therefore include etc. who included only the hair between the legs, and excluded the hair under the armpits and on the whole body [since they are not “visible collections of hair].” But here the accepted law is that he shaves his body as smooth as a gourd, either because this is one [of the three instances] where the practice goes beyond the Biblical text,⁶⁶Sotah 16 a. or because the accepted law is like the opinion of Rabbi Akiba, who [as a consequence of his wider method of exegesis] included the hair of the whole body [in the requirement of being shaved], and excluded only the hair within the nose [or ears]. So also have we been taught in a Mishnah [like Rabbi Akiba]:⁶⁷Negaim 14:2. “He passed the razor over the whole of his body,” and it is further explained in the second chapter of Tractate Sotah.⁶⁶Sotah 16 a.

ורחץ את בשרו במים וטהר, in line with the previously mentioned instruction “he must pitch his tent outside the camp.” (verse 8)

ורחץ את בשרו במים וטהר and he will bathe his flesh in water and be "clean." Why did the Torah have to write the word בשרו, his flesh? We have stated that the word בשרו in 15,13 in connection with the זב meant that only the זב and not the מצורע requires immersion in מים חיים, and that the word excludes washing of the clothing in מים חיים from the requirement. It is not possible to justify both these exegetical comments from the use of a single word בשרו. Now that this word appears here also and is not needed in its own right, the comment of Korban Aharon on 15,13 is acceptable. We can also ask why the word במים had to be written in this verse again. The explanation we offered for that word being written in verse 8 does not apply here. In that verse we could have erred by thinking that but for that word the מטהר would have had to immerse himself in מים חיים, seeing he had already had to undergo sprinkling with מים חיים. There was no reason to make such a קל וחומר the second time. If you were to argue that the whole procedure of purifying the מצורע is a single procedure and that therefore any possible misunderstanding and the subsequent קל וחומר would apply equally to both washings, we have already eliminated the need for bathing in מים חיים, even in an instance when sprinkling with מים חיים had been necessary. There could not have been room for error then to make the word במים necessary a second time.

Every place in which there is a collection of hair [which] is visible. “He shall shave off all of his hair,” a general statement; “his head, his beard, and his eyebrows,” a statement of particulars; “he shall shave off all of his hair,” again a general statement. [This constitutes a] כלל ופרט וכלל — and you must judge only like the particulars [i.e., the general statement must conform to the particulars listed between the general statements in the verse]. Just as the particulars are clearly in a place where there is a collection of hair which is visible, so too every place in which there is a collection of hair which is visible, such as the mustache. This excludes the hair of the armpits or of the genitals that although it is a collection of hair, it is not visible. And it excludes the hair on the hands that although it is visible, it is not a collection of hair as [written in] the statement of particulars.

והיה ביום השביעי יגלח, and as soon as the seventh day has come, he will shave all his hair. The reference is to hair that has grown during the preceding seven days. There are two occasions when shaving has to occur. He has to perform two separate shavings;

We would have to answer that the scholar arguing that without the word במים a second time, the only thing which the first word במים eliminated was the need for מים חיים for his first bathing, something that anyway did not confer complete purity on him. On the other hand, we could have argued that the final bathing, which results in the absolute purity of the מטהר, would require מים חיים unless specifically excluded by the word במים again in our verse. We must not forget that the זב is purified completely by a single bathing (15,14). The two situations are therefore not comparable. Even though the second purification process of the מצורע is not accompanied by sprinkling of מים חיים, I could have argued that it should not involve a procedure inferior to that of the זב. If the Torah wrote the word במים also in our verse, this teaches that no מים חיים is required in the final bathing of the מצורע.

את כל שערו את ראשו, “all the hair on his head;” but when the Torah prescribes the Levites as having to shave off their hair, it requires only the eyelids and eyebrows and their body hair. (Numbers 8,7). The purpose there is for cosmetic purposes. Usually they only shave off excess hair and they leave most of it. If they had been asked to remove all their body hair they would present themselves as practically naked in the Presence of the glory of G-d;People who had been afflicted with tzoraat, on the other hand, would have been asked to remove the whole skin over their flesh if they would be able to survive such a procedure. The Torah, therefore, does not ask this of them, but is content with a symbolic procedure. It only wants to ensure that all the symptoms of their affliction have been removed.

The Torah was particular to write the word בשרו which is the very word which caused us to argue in the case of the זב that he needed to bathe himself in running water from a well. Had the word בשרו not been mentioned in our verse also, I would have concluded that the only thing which the word במים excluded was the need to wash the clothing, etc., of the מצורע in מים חיים, but that he would have to bathe at least his body in running water from a well based on the קל וחומר from the situation the Torah describes when telling us about the purification rites of the זב.

ואת כל שערו, “and all of his hair;” what is the meaning of these words? Why does the Torah repeats this instruction? It is to emphasise the critical importance of this procedure and its date. It must be performed on the seventh day, not on the eighth or ninth or tenth day.

You may be tempted to ask why the Torah did not merely write ורחץ בשרו במים in verse 9 and the word במים would have been totally unnecessary in verse 8. The reason this does not work is that I would then have argued that the need for מים חיים was eliminated only for the second bathing which did not have to be preceded by sprinkling the מצורע with מים חיים. This argument, however, is not true for the first bathing by the מטהר which was preceded by his being sprinkled with מים חיים. I would then still have learned the קל וחומר from the זב so that I would have needed the word במים to counter that קל וחומר. [The author continues examining other alternatives for another page or so. I have decided to omit those in the interest of brevity. Ed.]

A moral-ethical approach to this whole paragraph sees it as describing Israel's exile. According to the Zohar the Gentiles are viewed as a צרעת infesting Israel, and dominating them by means of this plague. The plague of צרעת is viewed a "surrounding or encircling" the Israelites bodies. You will also find statements by our sages that even in Egypt Israel's redemption was only possible because they did not indulge in לשון הרע, bad-mouthing each other. This compliment is based on Exodus 3,22 where the Israelites are told that they should ask their neighbours to lend them silver and golden trinkets something they did not do until 12 months later in Exodus 11,2. They were able to contain themselves during all this time without taunting their Egyptian neighbours during this entire period. No single sin results in as much alienation between man and his Maker as the sin of לשון הרע, careless and even defamatory use of one's tongue. This is why the Torah wrote: זאת תהיה תורת המצורע, referring to the Jewish people which had become victimised by this affliction. The words ביום טהרתו imply that Israel is to purify itself by refraining from the sin of לשון הרע and all that it involves. The word הכהן in the sentence והובא אל הכהן refers to G'd. Having previously been alienated from its G'd, the repentance of the Jewish people will once again bring it close to Him (compare Zohar based on the verse in Isaiah 57,19: שלום שלום לרחוק ולקרוב, "Peace, peace to the far and subsequently near.") Following this reconciliation, G'd is described in Zachariah 14,3 as "going out to fight the nations of the world." This is alluded to here by the words ויצא הכהן אל מחוץ למחנה, that G'd had left the camp of the שכינה, i.e. the land of Israel, to a place of impurity to which the Israelites were exiled due to their sins. וראה הכהן והנה נרפא הנגע and as soon as G'd sees that the sin which was the cause of the plague (the exile under the dominion of the Gentiles) has been healed,

וצוה הכהן, G'd will issue directives for two birds to be taken, etc. These two birds represent the two Messiahs, the Mashiach ben Yoseph and the Mashiach ben David. The reason the Messiah is called a bird is that this is a description for souls in the higher regions. The Zohar on פרשת בלק Numbers 24,17 quotes another example of the Messiah being called a "bird." We quote: "From this cave there emerges a very great bird which will rule over the world and the kingdom will be handed over to him." All these expressions are euphemisms for celestial forces as any student of the Kabbalah is aware of. We have found that the first Messiah will be from the tribe of Ephrayim who will nevertheless die while revealing himself; he will be followed by the Messiah descended from David. When the Torah speaks of G'd taking "two birds which are pure," these words are similes for the two kinds of Messiah.

The words ועץ ארז ושני חולעת ואזב, "and the cedar-wood and the scarlet and the hyssop," are allusions to the merits of the three patriarchs. Abraham is represented by the word עץ ארז; He was a man of gigantic spiritual stature. Jacob is represented by the words ושני תולעת, seeing he is called by that "nickname" in Isaiah 41,14 i.e. אל תירא תולעז יעקב, "do not be afraid O worm Jacob;" Isaac is represented by the word אזוב, seeing Isaac symbolises the attribute of גבורה, strength, heroism. The Messiah will have to combine all those attributes within himself.

The word ושחט in this context is an allusion to the death of the first Messiah as G'd said אל כלי חרש על מים חיים. He will die as atonement for the sins of the people. The Torah speaks of כלי חרש, "a vessel made of earthenware," because original man was made of "dust from the earth" (Genesis 2,7); the entire human race was perceived as a כלי חרש, subject to irrevocable fragmentation, because man had not yet been given the Torah. Torah is compared to running water from a well, i.e. מים חיים. When there is no Torah in Israel it is no better than a כלי חרש, subject to total annihilation. This is why one of the two "birds" had to be slaughtered, i.e. would die. The death of that bird at the hands of the Gentiles, i.e. the death of the Messiah from the tribe of Ephrayim would give G'd a legal excuse to don His garments of revenge and to reverse His customary practice of wearing His "suit of mercy" by donning His "suit of retribution." As a result, He would dispose of all the wicked nations. Having been told what would happen if Israel would not practice Torah you can extrapolate that if they would observe Torah none of the afflictions alluded to in our portion as a national disease would have to occur, and the righteous (the first Messiah) would not have to die. The Ari Zal wrote that whenever we pray our regular prayers we must include the request that the Mashiach ben Yoseph should not die. Every prayer adds to the merit of that Messiah so that the collective prayers of the Jewish people may be sufficient to cancel the decree that he would die at the hands of the Gentiles.

The Torah goes on to speak about the צפור החיה, the surviving bird, i.e. the Mashiach ben David whom G'd will take and to whom He will attach the merits of the Patriarchs plus the right to avenge the murder of the Mashiach ben Yoseph; this is why the Torah writes: "He will take it together with the cedar-wood, etc., and dip it in the blood of the bird which has been slaughtered." This means that the combined power of the attribute of Mercy will outweigh the power of the attribute of Justice so that all the impurities of the Jewish people will be atoned for. When the Torah speaks here about the seven sprinklings to be performed on the מטהר, this is an allusion to the seven levels of impurity. Israel will be cleansed of one level of impurity by each of the seven sprinklings. Once this has been accomplished the "bird" will emerge from the cave mentioned in the Zohar, etc. The words על פני השדה, refer to this present world, and the message is that the Messiah will then rule over the whole world. After that, וכבס את המטהר, He will bathe Israel and its clothes, i.e. the sins which have formed its dirty garments and have stained its soul. The removal of the "dirty clothing" may be compared to the vision of the prophet Zecharyah 3 where the angel is described as removing the sin-stained clothing from the High Priest Yoshua in a similar simile describing the redemption from the exile in Babylon. וגלח את כל שערו, "and he will shave the hairs off his entire body;" these words are hyperbole for the removal of unworthy mental outgrowths. The words ורחץ במים are hyperbole for Israel immersing itself in Torah. This latter procedure will purify Israel's thought processes also. ואחר יבא אל המחנה, "After that he can enter the camp;" this is a reference to the camp of the שכינה, i.e. Jersualem on earth which will descend to earth having been built in Heaven.

The Torah goes on to say: וישב מחוץ לאהלו, he will still have to sit outside his own residence seeing that he cannot unite with the שכינה until the seven days of purification have passed which are necessary in order that one receive an important guest with due honour. On the seventh day then the Israelites are ready to welcome the holy guest. You will find a similar concept alluded to in Ezekiel 43,26: "for seven days let them purify the altar, cleanse it, etc." You will note that Ezekiel speaks of two purifications. The first purification achieves the removal of negative influences, The second purification accomplishes the repentant sinner's approach to the sacred, to that which is holy.

That is that He commanded us that we immerse in the mikveh waters, and that we then become pure from one of the various types of impurities with which we have become impure. And that is His, may He be blessed, saying, "and he shall bathe in water" (Leviticus 15:16). And it comes in the tradition that it is water that all of one's body can enter, and that is the measurement of a mikveh - unless the waters are running waters, which have no measurement; as is explained in the analysis of this commandment. And it is among the stipulations specifically for the zav, that the waters that purify him be running - as in the Torah, it says, "living waters" (Leviticus 15:13). And the intention of the statement that immersion is a positive commandment is not that anyone impure is obligated to perforce be purified, in the same way that anyone covered by a cloak must make tzitzit, or anyone with a home must make a parapet. Rather what is intended is the law of immersion - and that is that the Torah told us that anyone who wants to be purified from his impurity will only complete it with immersion in water; and he will then be purified. And the language of the [Sifra] (Sifra, Acharei Mot, Section 5:3) is, "'And he shall bathe [...] in water' (Leviticus 16:26) - I might think that it is a decree of the King (that he must immerse). [Hence] we learn to say, 'and then he may come to the camp' - from his impurity." This hints to the principle that we have explained - that the law is only that anyone who wants to become pure do this. That is the law, and that is the commandment - and not that he be obligated perforce to immerse. Rather, anyone who wants to remain impure and not enter the camp of the Divine Presence for a certain time is allowed [to do so]. And it has already appeared in the books of truth that one who becomes impure and immerses is purified, but he does not complete his purification until the sun goes down for him. And it also appears in the accepted tradition that when he immerses, his naked flesh must be in contact with the water itself and that there not be anything separating between him and the water. Behold this commandment has been explained to you - and that is the commandment of immersion; and it includes the regulations of the mikveh, the regulations of bathing and the regulations of one who has immersed that day (before sunset). And this law is explained in Tractate Mikvaot and in Tractate Tevul Yom. (See Parashat Metzora Mishneh Torah, Immersion Pools 1-11)