וְכֹ֛ל אֲשֶׁר־יִגַּע־בּ֥וֹ הַטָּמֵ֖א יִטְמָ֑א וְהַנֶּ֥פֶשׁ הַנֹּגַ֖עַת תִּטְמָ֥א עַד־הָעָֽרֶב׃ (פ)
און אַלץ װאָס דער אומרײנער װעט זיך אָנרירן אָן דעם, זאָל זײַן אומרײן; און דער מענטש װאָס רירט זיך אָן אים אָן, זאָל זײַן אומרײן ביזן אָװנט.
Rashi
And one who is impure by a corpse - one who touches a corpse is a primary source of impurity. The corpse itself, however, is a super-primary source of impurity; one who touches it becomes a primary source of impurity who can then impurify people and vessels. The verse states: "Whatever that impure person touches shall be impure" [Numbers 19:22]; this verse is discussing one who is impure by a corpse, and implies that he can impurify people, since it states "and the person who touches..." [Numbers 19:22]
English Explanation of Mishnah Oholot
What [is the case of] two? A person who touches a corpse is defiled with seven days’ defilement and a person who touches him is defiled with a defilement lasting until the evening. Numbers 19:11 explicitly states that one who has contact with a corpse is defiled for seven days. Verse 22 states, "and the person who touches him shall be unclean until evening." "Him" refers to the person who came into contact with the corpse.
Siftei Chakhamim
For the deed of the [Golden] Calf. You might ask: [There is a rule that] the prosecution cannot serve as the defense, as Rashi explains in Parshas Chukas (Bamidbar 19:22)! The answer is: That [rule] applies specifically regarding to the service performed inside [the Holy of Holies], such as the garments of kehunah û when the kohein godol entered the most innermost, he would not wear any garments that had gold, because “the prosecution, etc.” There was no concern about this [rule], though, regarding the service performed outside. [Alternatively:] We need not ask: Since Aharon sinned with regard to the [Golden] Calf, this raises the concern that the prosecution cannot serve as the defense, as Rashi explains in Parshas Chukas. [The answer is:] It is different there, because the Red Heifer was to atone for all of Israel. If Aharon was making the atonement [instead of Elozor his son, see Rashi (ibid.)], there would be reason to be concerned that the prosecution cannot serve as the defense, but here, where he was atoning only for himself, this rule is not applicable. Re’m writes: However, that which Rashi says: “to let know that Hashem forgave him by means of this calf for the deed of the [Golden] Calf,” I do not know how it lets us know this. If it was because the honor of Hashem appeared to them by means of these offerings, which demonstrates that Hashem atoned by means of this calf for the deed of the [Golden] Calf — then even without this calf we would also know that since the honor of Hashem appeared to them by means of Aharon’s bringing the offerings he has already achieved atonement for his sin... It appears to me that Rashi derives this from what it is written: “Take, for yourself, a young calf...” Why does it say, “for yourself”? It should only say, “Take a young calf...” as it is written regarding the people (v. 3): “Take a he-goat...” Rather, perforce, since it is written, “Take, for yourself, a young calf for a sin-offering,” it means that the taking should be ‘for you,’ i.e., for your good: “To let us know [that Hashem forgave]...” Alternatively: Rashi’s proof is from that which Aharon was commanded about this calf for a sin-offering. Normally, the sin-offering of an anointed kohein is a bullock, as it says in Parshas Vayikro (4:3). Why, then, did He command a calf for the sin-offering here? Rather, [it must be:] “To let know that Hashem forgave him by means of this calf for the deed of the [Golden] Calf which he made.” [This is from] Toras Kohanim. [The Sages made this drashah] because otherwise, why did Aharon take a calf whereas Israel [took] a he-goat? Rather, Aharon brought a calf because he sinned with a calf, and Israel [brought] a he-goat because they sinned with a he-goat — in that they dipped the tunic in blood [after selling Yosef]. You might ask: If so, this poses a difficulty with regard to the burnt-offering as well: Why was Israel’s burnt-offering a calf, and Aharon’s burnt-offering a ram? The answer is: Since Aharon sinned with an action, in that he made the Golden Calf, therefore he brought a sin-offering that is appropriate for a sinful deed. Israel, on the other hand, sinned in thought, for they erred by following after the Golden Calf, brought a calf as a burnt-offering, since a burnt-offering atones for [sinful] thought, as it is written (Yechezkel 20:32): “העולה על רוחכם” [the עולה is for what enters your mind]. This is because those who sinned [with the Golden Calf] by deed were [already] judged by Moshe with their appropriate judgment. Aharon, however, brought a burnt-offering, although he sinned with deed, because Aharon also sinned in thought, for in his mind he consented to make the Golden Calf (Gur Aryeh).