| 55Then the priest must examine the article after the lesion has been washed. If the lesion has not changed its color, and the lesion has not spread, it is ritually defiled. You must burn it in fire; it is a deep-looking lesion on the worn or new article. |
|
נהוְרָאָ֨ה הַכֹּהֵ֜ן אַֽחֲרֵ֣י | הֻכַּבֵּ֣ס אֶת־הַנֶּ֗גַע וְ֠הִנֵּ֠ה לֹֽא־הָפַ֨ךְ הַנֶּ֤גַע אֶת־עֵינוֹ֙ וְהַנֶּ֣גַע לֹֽא־פָשָׂ֔ה טָמֵ֣א ה֔וּא בָּאֵ֖שׁ תִּשְׂרְפֶ֑נּוּ פְּחֶ֣תֶת הִ֔וא בְּקָֽרַחְתּ֖וֹ א֥וֹ בְגַבַּחְתּֽוֹ: |
| אַֽחֲרֵי הֻכַּבֵּס - After [the lesion] has been washed. הֻכַּבֵּס is a form similar to הֵעָשׂוֹת, i.e., it is a passive infinitive. |
|
אַֽחֲרֵי הֻכַּבֵּס.
לְשׁוֹן הֵעָשׂוֹת:
|
| לֹֽא־הָפַךְ הַנֶּגַע אֶת־עֵינוֹ - (lit.) The lesion has not changed its appearance - i.e., it did not turn duller than its previous appearance. |
|
לֹֽא־הָפַךְ הַנֶּגַע אֶת־עֵינוֹ.
לֹא הָכְהָה מִמַּרְאִיתוֹ:
|
| וְהַנֶּגַע לֹֽא־פָשָׂה - And the lesion has not spread. We understand from here that if it did not change color and it did not spread, it is ritually defiled, and it goes without saying that that is also the case if it did not change color and did spread. However, if it changed from red to green or vice versa but did not spread, I do not know how to treat it. Scripture therefore states: וְהִסְגִּיר אֶת הַנֶּגַע “and quarantine the lesion” – in any event, i.e., the change indicates that this is a new lesion. This is the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah. But the sages say: It is still considered an unchanged legion and therefore ritually defiled – as stated in Torat Kohanim. I have alluded to this explanation here in order to explain the verse in accordance with its wording. |
|
וְהַנֶּגַע לֹֽא־פָשָׂה.
שָׁמַעְנוּ שֶׁאִם לֹא הָפַךְ וְלֹא פָשָׂה טָמֵא — וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר לֹא הָפַךְ וּפָשָׂה — הָפַךְ וְלֹא פָשָׂה אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ מַה יֵּעָשֶׂה לוֹ, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמָר "וְהִסְגִּיר אֶת הַנֶּגַע" — מִכָּל מָקוֹם, דִּבְרֵי רַ' יְהוּדָה, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים וְכוּ', כִּדְאִיתָא בְּתּוֹרַת כֹּהֲנִים, וּרְמַזְתִּיהָ כָּאן לְיַשֵּׁב הַמִּקְרָא עַל אָפְנָיו:
|
| פְּחֶתֶת הוּא - It is a deep-looking lesion. This term denotes a recess, as in בְּאַחַת הַפְּחָתִים “in one of the pits,” i.e., it is deeply set – a lesion that appears sunken into the garment. |
|
פְּחֶתֶת הוּא.
לְשׁוֹן גֻּמָּא, כְּמוֹ בְּאַחַת הַפְּחָתִים (שמואל ב י"ז), כְּלוֹמַר שְׁפֵלָה הִיא — נֶגַע שֶׁמַּרְאָיו שׁוֹקְעִין (ספרא):
|
| בְּקָֽרַחְתּוֹ אוֹ בְגַבַּחְתּֽוֹ - Its meaning is as Onkelos translates it: בִּשְׁחִיקוּתֵהּ אוֹ בַחֲדָתוּתֵהּ, “when it is worn or when it is new.” |
|
בְּקָֽרַחְתּוֹ אוֹ בְגַבַּחְתּֽוֹ.
כְּתַרְגּוּמוֹ בִּשְׁחִיקוּתֵהּ אוֹ בְחַדָּתוּתֵהּ:
|
| קָֽרַחְתּוֹ - refers to worn, old materials. Scripture uses these terms (which literally mean “bald spot or forehead”) because it was necessary to expound these words with a halachic analogy: From where do we know that a lesion in clothes that spread all over the article becomes rid of ritual defilement? It says קָרַחַת and גַּבַּחַת regarding people and קָרַחַת and גַּבַּחַת regarding garments. Just as there, if it erupted all over the body he is rid of ritual defilement, so too here, if it spread all over the article it is rid of ritual defilement – therefore Scripture here used the terms קָרַחַת and גַּבַּחַת. And regarding its interpretation and translation in our context, this is its meaning: קָרַחַת implies old and גַּבַּחַת implies new, as if it were written: “at its end or at its beginning,” for קָרַחַת denotes the back and גַּבַּחַת denotes the front, as it says: “if he loses the hair on the side toward his face, he is bald at the front (גִּבֵּחַ),” whereas קָרַחַת is the entire area from where the top of the head slopes toward its back. So is explained in Torat Kohanim. |
|
קָֽרַחְתּוֹ.
שְׁחָקִים, יְשָׁנִים; וּמִפְּנֵי הַמִּדְרָשׁ שֶׁהֻצְרַךְ לִגְזֵרָה שָׁוָה — מִנַּיִן לִפְרִיחָה בַבְּגָדִים שֶׁהִיא טְהוֹרָה? נֶאֶמְרָה קָרַחַת וְגַבַּחַת בָּאָדָם, וְנֶאֶמְרָה קָרַחַת וְגַבַּחַת בַּבְּגָדִים, מַה לְּהַלָּן פָּרַח בְּכֻלּוֹ טָהוֹר אַף כָּאן פָּרַח בְּכֻלּוֹ טָהוֹר — לְכָךְ אָחַז הַכָּתוּב לְשׁוֹן קָרַחַת וְגַבַּחַת; וּלְעִנְיַן פֵּרוּשׁוֹ וְתַרְגּוּמוֹ זֶהוּ מַשְׁמָעוֹ: קָרַחַת לְשׁוֹן יְשָׁנִים וְגַבַּחַת לְשׁוֹן חֲדָשִׁים — כְּאִלּוּ נִכְתַּב בְּאַחֲרִיתוֹ אוֹ בְקַדְמוּתוֹ — שֶׁהַקָּרַחַת לְשׁוֹן אֲחוֹרַיִם וְגַּבַּחַת לְשׁוֹן פָּנִים, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב וְאִם מִפְּאַת פָּנָיו וְגוֹ', וְהַקָּרַחַת כָּל שֶׁשּׁוֹפֵעַ וְיוֹרֵד מִן הַקָּדְקֹד וּלְאַחֲרָיו, כָּךְ מְפֹרָשׁ בְּתּוֹרַת כֹּהֲנִים:
|
| 56But if the priest examines the article after it has been washed, and the lesion has become darker, he must rip it out of the garment, the leather, or the warp- or woof-threads. |
|
נווְאִם֘ רָאָ֣ה הַכֹּהֵן֒ וְהִנֵּה֙ כֵּהָ֣ה הַנֶּ֔גַע אַֽחֲרֵ֖י הֻכַּבֵּ֣ס אֹת֑וֹ וְקָרַ֣ע אֹת֗וֹ מִן־הַבֶּ֨גֶד֙ א֣וֹ מִן־הָע֔וֹר א֥וֹ מִן־הַשְּׁתִ֖י א֥וֹ מִן־הָעֵֽרֶב: |
| וְקָרַע אֹתוֹ - He must rip it out - i.e., he must tear out the area of the lesion from the garment and burn that part. |
|
וְקָרַע אֹתוֹ.
יִקְרַע מְקוֹם הַנֶּגַע מִן הַבֶּגֶד וְיִשְׂרְפֶנּוּ:
|
| 57If the lesion reappears on the garment, the warp- or woof-threads, or any leather article, it is a recurrent growth. You must burn in fire the entire article upon which the lesion is found. |
|
נזוְאִם־תֵּֽרָאֶ֨ה ע֜וֹד בַּ֠בֶּ֠גֶד אֽוֹ־בַשְּׁתִ֤י אֽוֹ־בָעֵ֨רֶב֙ א֣וֹ בְכָל־כְּלִי־ע֔וֹר פֹּרַ֖חַת הִ֑וא בָּאֵ֣שׁ תִּשְׂרְפֶ֔נּוּ אֵ֥ת אֲשֶׁר־בּ֖וֹ הַנָּֽגַע: |
| פֹּרַחַת הִוא - i.e., it is something that grows again. |
|
פֹּרַחַת הִוא.
דָּבָר הַחוֹזֵר וְצוֹמֵחַ:
|
| בָּאֵשׁ תִּשְׂרְפֶנּוּ - (lit.) You must burn it in fire - i.e., the entire garment. |
|
בָּאֵשׁ תִּשְׂרְפֶנּוּ.
אֶת כָּל הַבֶּגֶד:
|
| 58Regarding any garment, warp- or woof-threads, or leather article that you wash, and from which the lesion disappears, it must be immersed a second time, this time in the water of a mikveh, and it will be rid this defilement. |
|
נחוְהַבֶּ֡גֶד אֽוֹ־הַשְּׁתִ֨י אֽוֹ־הָעֵ֜רֶב אֽוֹ־כָל־כְּלִ֤י הָעוֹר֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר תְּכַבֵּ֔ס וְסָ֥ר מֵהֶ֖ם הַנָּ֑גַע וְכֻבַּ֥ס שֵׁנִ֖ית וְטָהֵֽר: |
| וְסָר מֵהֶם הַנָּגַע - And from which the lesion disappears - i.e., if, when it was first washed by order of the priest, the lesion disappeared entirely from it. |
|
וְסָר מֵהֶם הַנָּגַע.
אִם כְּשֶׁכִּבְּסוּהוּ בַתְּחִלָּה עַל פִּי כֹהֵן סָר מִמֶּנּוּ הַנֶּגַע לְגַמְרֵי.
|
| וְכֻבַּס שֵׁנִית - It must be immersed a second time. This denotes ritual immersion. Onkelos generally translates all instances of the root כבס in this passage as “cleansing” – וְיִתְחַוַּר except for this case, which is not for the purpose of cleansing the physical manifestation of the lesion but for ritual immersion of the entire article in a mikveh. This is why Onkelos translates it as וְיִצְטַבַּע. Similarly, all instances of “washing garments” where ritual immersion is meant are translated by Onkelos as וְיִצְטַבַּע. |
|
וְכֻבַּס שֵׁנִית.
לְשׁוֹן טְבִילָה; תַּרְגּוּם שֶׁל כִּבּוּסִין שֶׁבְּפָרָשָׁה זוֹ לְשׁוֹן לִבּוּן, "וְיִתְחַוַּר", חוּץ מִזֶּה, שֶׁאֵינוֹ לְלִבּוּן אֶלָּא לִטְבֹּל, לְכָךְ תַּרְגּוּמוֹ "וְיִצְטַבַּע", וְכֵן כָּל כִּבּוּסֵי בְגָדִים שֶׁהֵן לִטְבִילָה מְתֻרְגָּמִין וְיִצְטַבַּע:
|
| 59This is the law governing the diagnosis of a tzara’at-lesion on a woolen or linen garment, warp- or woof-threads, or any leather article, according to which it becomes rid of defilement or defiled.” |
|
נטזֹ֠את תּוֹרַ֨ת נֶֽגַע־צָרַ֜עַת בֶּ֥גֶד הַצֶּ֣מֶר | א֣וֹ הַפִּשְׁתִּ֗ים א֤וֹ הַשְּׁתִי֙ א֣וֹ הָעֵ֔רֶב א֖וֹ כָּל־כְּלִי־ע֑וֹר לְטַֽהֲר֖וֹ א֥וֹ לְטַמְּאֽוֹ: |
