๐พ Archived View for scholasticdiversity.us.to โบ scriptures โบ jewish โบ t โบ Or%20HaChaim%20on%20Levitiโฆ captured on 2024-05-10 at 12:44:09. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
10 โ[1] **ืืืื ืืคืื ืฉืขืจ ืืื ืืืืืช ืืฉืจ ืื, and it has turned the hair white, and there be healthy flesh, etc.** The plain meaning of the verse is that two conditions must be present in order for the afflicted person to be ritually impure, 1) healthy flesh, 2) white hair; our sages in *Torat Kohanim* write as follows: "I might have thought that the person remains "clean" until he develops white hair plus an area of healthy flesh; to teach me that this is not so the Torah wrote: 'it is an old ืฆืจืขืช,' i.e. it is impure and no other symptom is needed. If so, why does our verse speak about white hair and healthy flesh? this teaches that impurity is not decreed unless the area of skin is large enough to accomodate both white hair and healthy flesh." Apparently the inference from the text that healthy flesh alone (when inside the white area) is sufficient cause to declare the person ritually impure was based on the word ื ืืฉื ืช; this poses a problem, however; granted that the presence of healthy flesh inside the white area does not need an additional symptom in order for the afflicted person to be declared ritually unclean -as distinct from the presence of white hair alone,- whence do we know that the presence of such healthy flesh by itself results in ritual impurity? Perhaps the word ืืื in our verse refers back to **either one** of two symptoms appearing; 1) the hair turning white in which case there is no need for a further symptom; 2) healthy flesh appearing, and not as *Korban Aharon* explains it as referring only to the appearance of healthy flesh. It is also possible that the rule that an area of healthy flesh within the white area is sufficient by itself to declare the afflicted person ritually impure is derived from the additional words ืืฉืจ ืื at the end of the verse. The words ืืื ืืื in verse 11 make it plain that no other symptoms were needed. Ignoring the words of *Torat Kohanim* for the moment, I believe that the absence of the words ืื ืืืืช ืืฉืจ ืื tells us that if both symptoms exist and the white area covers the entire surface of the skin this indicates that the person is ritually pure, something I could not have inferred if the Torah had written the word ืื. How would I then have known that the person could be declared "clean" while suffering simultaneously from **two** symptoms each of which is basically a symptom signifying ritual impurity?
Version: Or Hachayim, trans. Eliyahu Munk
Source: http://www.urimpublications.com/or-hachayim-commentary-on-the-torah-5-vols.html
License: CC-BY