Комментарий к Вайикра 6:3

מדו בד HIS LINEN ROBE — this is what is elsewhere termed the כתונת, the undercoat; and why then is it here called מדו? To intimate that it (the כתונת) must be made to his measure (מדו from מדד to “measure”) (Sifra, Tzav, Chapter 2 1; Yoma 23b).

AND THE PRIEST SHALL PUT ON ‘MIDO’ (HIS GARMENT OF) LINEN. “This is a reference to the k’toneth (tunic). Why then does Scripture here call it mido [which means ‘his measure’]? It is to indicate that the tunic is to be made to his measure. AND HIS LINEN BREECHES SHALL HE PUT UPON HIS FLESH — that there should be nothing interposing between them.” This is Rashi’s language.
Now the [daily] removal of the ashes [from the altar, which is the subject-matter of this verse], must be done with the priest wearing the [four] garments of priesthood,²⁶The ordinary priest ministered in four garments: the tunic, breeches, turban, and the belt. To these the High Priest added four more pieces of raiment: the breastplate, the ephod, the robe and the frontlet. — The question then appears: since removing the ashes from the altar had to be done by a priest, why does Scripture here single out only two of the garments, the tunic and the breeches? — The taking up of the ashes was the very first act in the day’s Service in the Sanctuary. See “The Commandments,” Vol. I, pp. 38-39. as no Service can be performed with only two of the [four] garments! However, He mentioned only these two garments because of new points that are added here to them, namely, that the tunic must be made to the priest’s measure. This means to say that if it was raised [above his feet], being so short that it did not reach his feet, and he performed therein one of the acts of offering, his Service is invalid. It further teaches that there must be nothing intervening between the breeches and his flesh. But the law requires equally that the priest who removes the ashes from the altar should wear all [four] priestly garments, for since Scripture mentioned that the removing of the ashes must be done with priestly garments, we know [automatically] that it requires four for the common priest and eight for the High Priest.²⁶The ordinary priest ministered in four garments: the tunic, breeches, turban, and the belt. To these the High Priest added four more pieces of raiment: the breastplate, the ephod, the robe and the frontlet. — The question then appears: since removing the ashes from the altar had to be done by a priest, why does Scripture here single out only two of the garments, the tunic and the breeches? — The taking up of the ashes was the very first act in the day’s Service in the Sanctuary. See “The Commandments,” Vol. I, pp. 38-39. So also is it explained in the second chapter of Tractate Yoma²⁷Yoma 23b. and in Torath Kohanim:²⁸Torath Kohanim, Tzav 2:1. “Why does Scripture repeat the term yilbash [‘he shall put on’ — ‘V’lavash hakohein’ (and the priest shall put on) his linen garment, and his linen breeches ‘yilbash’ (he shall put) upon his flesh]? It is to include the turban and the belt” [which the priest is also to put on for the removing of the ashes].
Now Onkelos translated the word mido as levushin [“garments” — as opposed to Rashi’s interpretation, according to which it refers only to one garment, the tunic]. It would appear then that according to Onkelos, the word mido is a term which includes all of the priest’s garments, as if the verse were stating, “and the priest shall put on linen garments.” Similarly we are to understand the expressions: ‘madav’ (his clothes) rent;²⁹I Samuel 4:12. that cometh down upon the collar ‘midothav’,³⁰Psalms 133:2. which means upon the edge of his garments; girded with ‘mido’ (his apparel) of war,³¹II Samuel 20:8. which means his garments. This then will be in accordance with the opinion of the Sage who says³²Rabbi Dosa (Yoma 12 b). See Ramban in Seder Pekudei (Exodus 39:28, Vol. II, p. 614). that the belt of the common priest was unlike the belt of the High Priest.³³The belt of the High Priest was made of blue, purple, scarlet [all wool] and twined linen. This is expressly stated in the Torah. The question appears as to how the belt for the common priests was made. Rabbi Dosa is of the opinion that it was made only of linen; Rabbi Yehudah Hanasi differs, holding that it was like that of the High Priest. Now since Onkelos, as explained by Ramban, explains the word mido as an inclusive term for “all” the priest’s garments, and the verse states, and the priest shall put on ‘mido’ (his ‘garments’ of) linen, Onkelos accordingly must agree with Rabbi Dosa that the belt of the common priest was unlike that of the High Priest, as the belt of the common priest was only of linen. Hence it states that the common priest shall put on all his garments of linen which includes the belt.

מדו, as in Numbers 23,18 בנו צפור, [in both instances the letter ו at the end is something extraneous. Ed.] It again occurs in that mode in Numbers 24,3. Basically the word מד refers to some kind of garment, especially work oriented or vocation oriented, as in Samuel I 4,12 where the expression ומדיו קרועים, refer to a “torn uniform.”

ולבש הכהן מדו בד ומכנסי בד, “the priest is to don his linen tunic and his linen trousers.” The Torah mentions the tunic and trousers in connection with the procedure of removing the ashes, although according to Nachmanides, [alluded to here by the author not by name but uncharacteristically as “ה'הג” הרב הגאון, Ed.] needs to wear all four of his priestly garments as there is no kind of Temple service that may be performed with fewer than four garments. The reason why only two of these garments were mentioned here is, that they both have a feature we did not hear about previously. The Torah, by writing מדו, indicates that these garments were not of standard measure but were fitted according to the size of the individual priest who would wear them, both the tunic and the trousers. It was important that nothing should separate the garments from the skin of the wearer. Nachmanides refers to Onkelos who translates מדו, as לבישין, writes: it appears that he understood the word as the name of a comprehensive garment, something we would refer to nowadays as the “uniform” worn by liveried people, for instance. The expression מדיו, in Samuel I 17,28 where Saul gave David his uniform also refers to a uniform tailored for him especially, [which because David was much shorter would have been a hindrance rather than a help to David in his fight against Goliath. Ed.] In Samuel I 4,12 we read about ומדיו קרועים ואדמה על ראשו, “the torn uniform and the earth on his head described the state of mourning of its wearer who brought news of the capture of the Holy Ark by the Philistines”, not to mention the thirty thousand men who had fallen in that battle.

Linen garment. Rashi is answering the question: Why is it written: “The kohein shall dress in his linen garment (מדו בד),” [using the unusual expression מדו for garment instead of בגד]? Above (Shemos 28, 39-40), it does not use such an expression concerning the garments of Aharon. Rashi answers: This is the kutones (undershirt) mentioned with regard to the garments of the kohanim that is worn close to his skin. The phrase, “On his skin” refers to both, for if it referred only to the linen pants, it should write: “The kohein shall dress in his linen garment, and linen pants on his [body] skin.” Why does it say, “he shall wear”? Rather, [it must be that] it refers to מדו as well, which is the kutones (Re’m).

מדו בד, “in a garment made of linen;” the letter ו at the end of the word: מדו is superfluous, just as the second letter ו in וחיתו ארץ in Genesis 1,24, and the letter ו in Numbers 24 in the word: .בנו

על בשרו [AND LINEN DRAWERS HE SHALL PUT] UPON HIS FLESH — This implies that nothing should interpose between them (cf. Sifra, Tzav, Chapter 2 3; Zevachim 19a).

והרים את הדשן, the procedure known as תרומת הדשן, the cleaning out of the ash, a procedure which could be performed all day long. It was mandatory to do this before the offering of the daily morning burnt offering. However, the removal from the camp of the ash could be taken care of any time during the day and not daily. When the top of the altar was too full it would be removed. (verse 4)

According to his size. Meaning: It should not be longer or shorter than his body, because I might think that since it is on his skin and he is wearing other garments on top of it, if it was shorter than his body it is of no concern. Therefore, Scripture teaches us [that it must be according to his size]. Otherwise, why does Scripture not call it a kutones as in the other places?

מדו בד, these are the cap, tunic, and belt worn by the ordinary priest, all of which are made of linen. The reason that they are all mentioned in the singular mode, is that whenever worn by the priest, all of them are worn simultaneously. The reason why the pants are mentioned separately, as we find already in Exodus 28,42, after the garments worn by the High Priest and the ordinary priests have been listed. The pants are mentioned separately, as both the High Priest and the ordinary priest wear the same kind of pants. According to Torat Kohanim, (Sifra on our verse) this is hinted at in the apparently extraneous word: ילבש, the four letters hinting that the ordinary priests wore four garments when on duty. The repetition both here and Exodus 28 that the pants must be worn on his skin, על בשרו, suggest that these pants must always be also the first garment the priest dons in order to cover his private parts. The plural mode מכנסים is similar to the English language where “pants” or “trousers” are in the plural mode because they refer to a single garment covering both legs.

והרים את הדשן AND HE SHALL TAKE UP THE ASHES — He raked a full pan of ashes from the innermost consumed mass of ashes and deposited them at the east side of the כבש (the inclined plane leading up to the altar) (Sifra, Tzav, Chapter 1 4 Yoma 20a; cf. Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 2:1).

Consumed ashes. Since it is written, “He shall separate the ashes,” which is an expression of separation — that he separates from the ashes. If he were to rake up all of it there would not be any separation.

In his linen garment. The Midrash interprets the verse: “It is the burntoffering (עולה) on its pyre” — anyone who is arrogant (= עולה) is judged with fire. That the עולה atones for arrogance is hinted in the verse (Yechezkel 20:32): “והעלה על רוחכם (lit. that which goes up upon your spirit).”

על בשרו, a delicate description of the priest’s private parts.

העולה‎ את ‎‏ אשר תאכל האש‎הדשן ‎ [HE SHALL TAKE OUT] THOSE ASHES INTO WHICH THE FIRE HATH CONSUMED THE BURNT OFFERING — and thus has made it into ashes; from those ashes he shall take out a תרומה, a portion, ושמו אצל המזבח AND PUT IT BESIDE THE ALTAR.

The innermost.. Because it is reasonable [to assume] that what was lying in the middle of the fire was extremely burnt up, they would take the innermost ashes.

The Torah mentions ashes in this context because the rectification for arrogance is ashes, i.e., one should say, “I am dust and ashes,” like Avraham. This causes that he will be elevated to great heights, for anyone who lowers himself is lifted up by Hashem. Thus, the kohein making the atonement wears these two garments: The linen garment, according to his size, and not too big — to hint that one should not behave in a manner beyond his level. Secondly, the linen pants, which atone for the transgression of illicit relations, which he needs if he was arrogant, as Chazal said (Sotah 4b): Anyone who is arrogant is considered as if he transgressed all the illicit relations. The ashes are placed next to the altar, which represents humility.

והרים את הדשן, “he shall lift up the ashes;” the plain meaning of the verse is that in order to remove the ashes the priest must first put on the garments described here. He is not allowed to wear street clothes even for performing this procedure.

[על המזבח [THE BURNT OFFERING] ON THE ALTAR — This implies that if he (the priest) finds any limbs of the burnt offering that were not yet consumed he shall put them back on the altar after having raked the coals hither and thither and having taken from the innermost ashes, because it states, העולה על המזבח ‎את ‎which implies: the burnt offering (i.e.so long as it can be called an עולה and not דשן) must be ‎on the altar] (Sifra, Tzav, Chapter 1 5; Yoma 45b; cf. Rashi there s. v. ‎אשר תאכל ‎ את העולה‎).

On the east of it. This is because it is written “next to the altar,” and the ramp was next to the altar. How do we know that it was the eastern side of the ramp? This is proven from what it is written in Parshas Vayikro (1:16): “Beside the altar, eastward, [to the place of the ashes].” There, too, it implies next to the ramp, and it is clearly written “eastward.” Perforce the place of the ashes was at the eastern side of the ramp, and that is what is meant by “eastward.”

את הדשן, “at least a fistful of ashes.”

And makes them ashes. Rashi is rectifying with this [the problem we might have] because the plain meaning of the verse implies that the ashes consume the fire. Therefore, he explains: “And makes them ashes,” i.e., the word “fire” refers to the phrase “[which consumes] the burnt offering.” Furthermore, Rashi explains that he separates from that ash, so that you will not think [he takes] all the ashes which [the fire] makes of the burnt-offering. Re’m explains: Otherwise, [it is problematic that] the verse begins with the ashes and concludes with the consumption of the burnt-offering. It should be understood as if it says, “And he shall separate the ashes” — and which ashes are these? — those “that are as a result of the fire that consumes [the burnt-offering” and makes it ashes].

That is that He commanded the priests to remove the ashes from off the altar every day. And this is what is called, removing the ashes. And that is His, may His name be blessed, saying, "he shall put on other vestments, and carry the ashes" (Leviticus 6:3). And the laws of this commandment have already been explained in Tamid and Yoma. (See Parashat Tzav; Mishneh Torah, Daily Offerings and Additional Offerings 2.)