Cytowanie Komentarza do Wyjścia 32:25

It appears that the intent of the Midrash’s author is to explain why this section is placed here. For it was stated on the first of Nissan, otherwise why would the impure individuals have come to Moses on the 14th of Nissan saying, We are unclean because of a dead person; why should we be excluded, etc. (Numbers 9:7)? If so, why was this section established here? Rather, certainly after arranging the Tabernacle in its place and causing His Divine Presence to dwell among them, He came to warn them not to cause the removal of the Divine Presence through these three primary sins that cause destruction. Therefore, He commanded to send out from the camp every person with tzara’at, every person with a discharge, and everyone impure from contact with the dead, because these three are distinctive signs that within them is either a trace of heresy of idolatry, which brings tzara’at, as it says regarding the Golden Calf, Moses saw that the people were unrestrained (Exodus 32:25). And our Sages said (Bamidbar Rabbah 7:4) that they became leprous, as it is written about the leper, his head shall be unrestrained (Leviticus 13:45). Due to this sin, the First and Second Temples were destroyed, for although they did not worship idols during the Second Temple period, nevertheless, they were guilty of the sin of baseless hatred and evil speech, which is equivalent to idolatry, as our Sages learned (Yalkut Shimoni, Psalms 656) from the verse, With our tongue we will prevail; our lips are with us; who is Lord over us? (Psalms 12:5). One who speaks evil speech is considered as if he has denied a fundamental principle of faith. The reason for sending the leper outside all three camps is to distance any trace of idolatry from all three. And if it is due to the sin of evil speech, he must dwell in isolation, just as he caused separation between people, and if he were not distanced from all three camps, he would not be dwelling in isolation. And everyone with a discharge — for his discharge is a sign that he is unbridled in matters of sexual immorality, and therefore he develops a discharge. He is sent out of the holy Divine Presence camp and out of the Levite camp, which also possesses holiness, as any place of holiness cannot tolerate matters of sexual immorality, in contrast to the Israelite camp, which does not have as much holiness. And everyone impure from contact with the dead — for this also indicates a wayward spirit within him, and that he is not careful about becoming impure through contact with a human corpse, thereby affecting the image of God, so to speak. Therefore, it is appropriate that he distance himself from the camp of the Divine Presence, as he damages the honor of the Divine Presence.

Therefore it is stated, “When a person will have on the skin of his flesh a se’et [raised blemish].” The term se’et implies elevation, and this type of tzara’at comes due to haughtiness of spirit, one who elevates himself above all others. Or sapachat [another form of skin affliction] — the term sapachat implies something that is secondary or attached, etc., and it comes upon one who covets monetary possessions, which are external attachments to a person and do not become an inherent part of the person at all, unlike other virtues. Similarly, Maimonides wrote in his Eight Chapters that all acquisitions such as wisdom, strength, and moral virtues all become an inherent part of a person and cleave to him, except for wealth, which is merely attached to a person externally and does not cleave to him at all. Or a “baheret” [bright spot] refers to whiteness; this type comes upon one who speaks lashon hara and whitens the face of his fellow [embarrasses him], causing white spots to appear, as “the red [appearance of the face] departs and the white comes” (Bava Metzia 58b), as it is written Jacob shall no longer be ashamed, neither shall his face turn pale (Isaiah 29:22). In this way, the appearance of one’s face testifies about him that his inner self is filled with love of money, or haughtiness, or speaking derogatorily about his fellow. This affliction brings his evil to the outside, exposing his wickedness in public, and for this reason the afflicted person is called “metzora” — brings out evil [motzi ra]. As it is said And Moses saw that the people were unruly (Exodus 32:25), and our Sages said that they were afflicted with tzara’at (Yalkut Shimoni, Metzora 14:563), as it is written [about a metzora] His head shall be unshorn (Leviticus 13:45), which is an expression of revealing, that his evil is revealed and seen by all eyes — and this is the concept of tzara’at.

It is also possible to interpret that what Moses meant was that even at a time when the Torah speaks of the people derogatively, calling them simply: העם, this does not mean that G’d is no longer fond of them. We have several examples of the term העם, being used in an unflattering manner; Numbers 25,1, ויחל העם, “the people debased itself;” or Numbers 21,5: וידבר העם באלו-קים, “the people spoke out against G’d.” Or, Exodus 32,1 ויקהל העם, “the people assembled” (in preparation of demanding a new leader). In each of these instances the word העם points at their being at a moral/spiritual low. Even if Moses, perhaps, did not relate to the people with fondness at such times, G’d did not stop being fond of them.
Still another way of understanding the words אף חובב עמים is that the word אף here means “anger” as it does on numerous occasions. The message is that even when G’d has reason to be angry at the people, He still also relates to them with fondness. The reason that this is so is that they are His people, עמים שלו.
כל קדושיו בידך, “all its holy ones were in Your hand.” A reference to the Levites (Ibn Ezra). They took their lives into their hands, i.e. they placed their lives in Your hands, when they executed the Israelites who had actively worshipped the golden calf.

תפריעו את העם ממעשיו means ye detach and take them away from their work, because they listen to you and believe that they may refrain from the work. Similar are: (Proverbs 4:15) “פרעהו pass not by it”, i. e. keep it far from thee, pass not by it; (Proverbs 1:25) “and ye withdraw (ותפרעו) all my counsel”; (Exodus 32:25) “for it is פרע” i. e. it had removed itself from the proper path and had made itself a thing to be abhorred (but cf. Rashi on this verse where he explains the word by מגולה — נתגלה שמצו וקלונו).

and what implications of any matter can be understood What hint of anything can a man understand from His deeds? Another explanation: שֶמֶץ is like (Exod. 32:25), “to the scandal (לשמצה),” uncomplimentary.

for he exposed Judah - Heb. הִפְרִיעַ, similar to (Exod. 32:25): “for Aaron had exposed them (פְּרָעֹה) (Jud. 5:2): “When breaches are made (בִּפְרֹעַ פְּרָעוֹת).”