Comentário sobre Números 19:13

במת בנפש [HE WHO TOUCHES] A DEAD BODY OF ANY PERSON — And what dead body is here intended? That of a human being (נפש האדם), the addition of בנפש האדם serving to exclude the person (body) of an animal, so intimating that uncleanness caused by it does not require sprinkling for its removal. Another explanation of בנפש is, that this term refers to a quarter of a log of blood (this being regarded as the minimum quantity necessary for maintaining life in a human being) (Chullin 72a).

HE HATH DEFILED THE SANCTUARY OF THE ETERNAL. Scripture mentioned this [punishment of] excision without explanation,⁵³I.e., without first saying here that one who is impure may not enter the Sanctuary or Tabernacle. saying, he hath defiled the Tabernacle of the Eternal,⁵⁴Above, Verse 13. — The Torah there uses the term mishkan (Tabernacle), and the same law applies of course to the mikdash (Sanctuary), mentioned here in Verse 20. Ramban here uses the terms interchangeably; and later on explains why the law is mentioned twice. because He had already warned us against defiling the Sanctuary, just as He said, she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the Sanctuary.⁵⁵Leviticus 12:4. For since He mentioned [this prohibition] there in dealing with a lesser degree of impurity, namely, that of a woman after childbirth in the days of her purification, which is a natural event for her, it [is self-understood that it] applies equally to all impure persons. He has also mentioned the [requirement of] immersion [in a ritual pool for purposes of purification], saying, but if he wash them not [i.e., the garments which have become unclean], nor bathe his flesh, then he shall bear his iniquity,⁵⁶Ibid., 17:16. that is to say, he will bear his iniquity if he transgresses [the law and does] that which he is admonished not to do [i.e., if he eats holy food or enters the Sanctuary whilst he is still impure, or when he is wearing impure garments]. Therefore He stated here in respect of the impurity [conveyed] by a corpse that whosoever touches the dead⁵⁴Above, Verse 13. — The Torah there uses the term mishkan (Tabernacle), and the same law applies of course to the mikdash (Sanctuary), mentioned here in Verse 20. Ramban here uses the terms interchangeably; and later on explains why the law is mentioned twice. and purifieth not himself [with the waters of purification], even though he washes his clothes and bathes himself in water, is [nonetheless] considered one who defiles the Tabernacle, just as if he had not immersed himself [in a ritual pool] at all. Thus it was only necessary to mention that the purification [by means of sprinkling the waters of purification] prevents him from becoming pure [if he did not sprinkle them upon himself, even if he washed his clothes and bathed himself in water], this being the meaning of the expression, his impurity is yet upon him,⁵⁴Above, Verse 13. — The Torah there uses the term mishkan (Tabernacle), and the same law applies of course to the mikdash (Sanctuary), mentioned here in Verse 20. Ramban here uses the terms interchangeably; and later on explains why the law is mentioned twice. that is to say, even though he has immersed himself [in a ritual pool] like all other impure people, he still remains impure, because the water of sprinkling hath not been sprinkled upon him.⁵⁴Above, Verse 13. — The Torah there uses the term mishkan (Tabernacle), and the same law applies of course to the mikdash (Sanctuary), mentioned here in Verse 20. Ramban here uses the terms interchangeably; and later on explains why the law is mentioned twice.
It is possible that the verse is referring to the man [mentioned above, who had become defiled by the corpse], and the meaning thereof is as follows: “whosoever toucheth the dead, even the body of any man that is dead, and purifieth not himself — ‘he who’ hath defiled the Tabernacle of the Eternal shall be cut off from Israel.” There are similar cases where the letter shin or the word asher [defining the nature of a relationship such as: who, which, that, etc.] is missing, [as in the following verses]: l’chol yavo g’vurathecha⁵⁷Psalms 71:18. [which is to be understood as: l’chol — asher — yavo g’vurathecha — Thy might to every one ‘that’ is to come]; v’chol yesh lo (and all he had) he put into his hand⁵⁸Genesis 39:4. [which is to be understood as: v’chol — asher — yesh lo — and all ‘that’ he had he put into his hand]; eth haderech yeilchu bah⁵⁹Exodus 18:20. [which is understood as: eth haderech — asher — yeilchu bah — the way ‘in which’ they must walk]. There are many such verses. And the meaning of the expression ‘ki’ he hath defiled the Sanctuary of the Eternal⁶⁰Here in Verse 20. is “‘when’ he has defiled the Sanctuary of the Eternal,” [this usage of the word ki being similar to that found in the verse]: ‘ki’ a bird’s nest chance to be before thee [which means: “‘when’ a bird’s nest chance to be before thee”],⁶¹Deuteronomy 20:6. and [it is like] its many companion-verses.
Now Scripture mentions here [the punishment of] excision twice [once in Verse 13 in connection with defiling the Tabernacle, and again in Verse 20 in connection with the Sanctuary]. In the opinion of our Rabbis⁶²Shebuoth 16b. this is in order to declare him liable for defiling the Tabernacle of the Tent of Meeting, and also for the Sanctuary, i.e., the Permanent House [the Temple in Jerusalem].⁶³See Vol. II, p. 335, Note 598. According to the plain meaning [of Scripture] it may be that eth mikdash Hashem [usually translated: the Sanctuary of the Eternal] refers to the holy offerings. For He had already declared that he that eateth of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace-offerings, which pertain unto the Eternal, having his impurity upon him,⁶⁴Leviticus 7:20. is liable to excision; therefore He now declared furthermore that [in the case of impurity conveyed through a corpse] even if [the impure person] immerses himself [in a ritual pool] he is still liable [to that punishment], if he does not purify himself on the third and seventh day [with the waters of purification, before he eats of the holy offerings]. The meaning, then, of mikdash Hashem [literally: the “Sanctuary” of the Eternal] will be [as if it said]: kod’shei Hashem (the “holy things” of the Eternal), as in the expression eth mik’dsho mimenu⁶⁵Above, 18:29. [literally: “the Sanctuary thereof,” which really means: eth kodsho mimenu — “the hallowed part thereof”]. Thus the [punishment of] excision mentioned in [this] section refers to [entering] the Sanctuary [whilst impure, as stated above in Verse 13], and [eating] its hallowed offerings [in such a state, as mentioned in this verse here].
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that [implied] by the literal meaning [of Scripture], namely that the first [mention of] excision [in Verse 13] refers to one who [actually] touches the corpse, as He said, Whosoever toucheth the dead, even the body of any man that is dead,⁶⁶Verse 13. and the second [mention thereof, i.e., in Verse 20 here] applies to those who were rendered impure by ohel³²Literally: “a tent.” This refers to the law that anything “spread over” an unclean object has the same effect as “a tent.” Hence if a tree shaded a corpse, the law of a dead body in a house or tent applies. but did not [actually] touch the bone or the grave; for the meaning of [the expression] but the man that shall be unclean, and shall not purify himself⁶⁰Here in Verse 20. is: “but the man that shall be unclean by any of these means [mentioned in Verses 14-16] and shall not purify himself, [that soul shall be cut off from the midst of the assembly].” By way of the Truth [the mystic teachings of the Cabala], it is possible that the expression mikdash Hashem is alluding to the Sanctuary of the Sanctuary.⁶⁷A reference to the Glory of G-d (Abusaula). See my Hebrew commentary, p. 272.

עוד טומאתו בו, even though he had immersed himself in a ritual bath.