This Week's Article

HaMet and Metzorah

Keilim (1:4) | Yisrael Bankier | 21 hours ago

The first four Mishnayot in Keilim discuss the different sources of tumah and how they differ from one another. The order is (mostly) in increasing manners in which the tumah can spread and their stringency. The last, most potent, is the corpse. The Mishnah explains that this is because, unlike other forms of tumah, it can transfer tumah "be'ohel".

As we will learn in masechet Ohalot, this means that if the corpse is under a covering, it makes everything else under that cover also tameh. It is important to add that the corpse will also make another object tameh if that object covers over it or if the corpse is above that object.

These extra means of transfer be'ohel are important. The Tifferet Yisrael explains that these three ways is what differentiates a corpse from a metzorah. We learnt earlier in the Mishnah that a metzorah can transfer tumah "be'viah". In other words if the metzorah were to enter a house, he would make everything inside tameh. Importantly, that is only similar to the first type of tumah be'ohel, where the source of tumah and the other object are under the same covering. Consequently, it is accurate when the Mishnah states that tumah be'ohel does not apply to any other source of tumah.

The Bartenura adds other differences. Firstly, when it comes to a house that has tzaraat, one only becomes tameh if they are fully inside the house. Simply extending a hand it to the house would not make the person tameh. That would not be case if there was a corpse inside the house. The next difference he adds, is that if the metzorah is inside, e.g. a Shul, and they put a partition ten tephachim high around him, then others may enter the shul and will not be come tameh. For tumah met, that low partition would not help. Finally, he adds that in the case of a metzorah, it makes a difference if the metzorah walks under a tree or stands there. Only if he is standing, would he make everything else under the tree tameh. For tumat ha'met, its movement is not important.

The simple understanding for this distinction is that tumat ha'met appears to spread under an ohel. When it comes to metzorah, the Bartenura explains that the Torah teaches that "outside the camp should be moshavo (his dwelling place)". Consequently, the metzora makes tameh anything in the region that is defined as moshavo".

The Mishnah Achrona however understands that the fact that the metzorah is metameh be'biah, is learnt for its connection to the laws of a house that has tzaraat -- a different source. He uses this to explain the differences between the laws of a metzorah that enters a house and stands under a tree. (See Negaim 13:7; Volume 18, Issue 35).

The Tosfot Anshei Shem explains that because of these distinctions, the Mishnah changed its language when listing tumat ha'met. With each type of tumah that is listed, the Mishnah introduces it with, "lemalah min..." -- "above that". It should follow then that the Mishnah should have added "lemalah min kulam" -- "above them all". Instead, the Mishnah used the language of chamur -- harsher. The term le'malah -- above -- implies a novelty that did not apply to the other sources of tumah that preceded it. The idea of tumah spread without any interaction with it and just being a shared space was indeed seen before, by the metzorah. Nevertheless, the laws that apply to a met are harsher.

Download

Calendar