Chumashחומש

לחם אלהיו. מַאֲכַל אֱלֹהָיו, כָּל סְעוּדָה קְרוּיָה לֶחֶם, כְּמוֹ "עֲבַד לְחֶם רַב" (דניאל ה'):

לחם אלהיו THE BREAD OF HIS GOD — This means, any food of his God (not “bread” only); any meal is termed לחם, as e. g., (Daniel 5:1) “he made a great banquet (לְחַם)” (cf. Rashi on Genesis 31:54).

כי כל איש אשר בו מום לא יקרב. אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיִּקְרַב, כְּמוֹ הַקְרִיבֵהוּ נָא לְפֶחָתֶךָ (מלאכי א'):

כי כל איש אשר בו מום לא יקרב FOR ANY MAN THAT HATH A BLEMISH SHALL NOT APPROACH — This means: it is not right that he should approach; It expresses the same idea as (Malachi 1:8) “[And if ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? and if ye offer the lame or sick, is it not evil?] offer it now unto thy governor! [will he be pleased with thee?]”.

חרם. שֶׁחָטְמוֹ שָׁקוּעַ בֵּין שְׁתֵּי הָעֵינַיִם, שֶׁכּוֹחֵל שְׁתֵּי עֵינָיו כְּאַחַת (ספרא; בכורות מ"ג):

חרם A FLAT-NOSED MAN — one whose nose is sunk between his two eyes so that he is able to paint both his eyes (for medical or cosmetic purposes) with one stroke (Sifra, Emor, Section 3 7; Mishna Bekhorot 7:3).

שרוע. שֶׁאֶחָד מֵאֵבָרָיו גָּדוֹל מֵחֲבֵרוֹ — עֵינוֹ אַחַת גְּדוֹלָה וְעֵינוֹ אַחַת קְטַנָּה, אוֹ שׁוֹקוֹ אַחַת אֲרֻכָּה מֵחֲבֶרְתָּהּ (ספרא; בכורות מ'):

שרוע HE THAT HATH A LIMB TOO LARGE — i.e. one of whose limbs forming a pair is larger than the other, e. g. one of his eyes is large and the other small, or, one of his legs is longer than the other (Bekhorot 40b; cf. Sifra, Emor, Section 3 9).

או גבן. שׁורי"ציולש בְּלַעַז, שֶׁגְּבִינֵי עֵינָיו שְׂעָרָן אָרֹךְ וְשׁוֹכֵב:

או גבן — sourcils in O. F. — is one whose eye-brows have their hair long so that they lie over his eyes (Bekhorot 43b)

או דק. שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בְעֵינָיו דֹּק, שֶׁקּוֹרִים טיל"א, כְּמוֹ "הַנּוֹטֶה כַדֹּק" (ישעיהו מ'):

או דק — one who has in his eye a membrane which is called “toile” (web) in old French The word is similar in meaning to (Isaiah 40:22) “It is He that stretcheth out the heavens like a web (כַּדֹּק) (Bekhorot 48a).

או תבלל. דָּבָר הַמְבַלְבֵּל אֶת הָעַיִן, כְּגוֹן חוּט לָבָן הַנִּמְשָׁךְ מִן הַלֹּבֶן וּפוֹסֵק בַּסִּירָא, שֶׁהוּא עֹגֶל הַמַּקִּיף אֶת הַשָּׁחֹר שֶׁקּוֹרִים פרוני"לא, וְהַחוּט הַזֶּה פּוֹסֵק אֶת הָעֹגֶל וְנִכְנָס בַּשָּׁחֹר; וְתַרְגּוּם תְּבַלּוּל "חִלִּיז", לְשׁוֹן חִלָּזוֹן, שֶׁהוּא דוֹמֶה לְתוֹלַעַת אוֹתוֹ הַחוּט, וְכֵן כִּנּוּהוּ חַכְמֵי יִשְֹרָאֵל בְּמוּמֵי הַבְּכוֹר חִלָּזוֹן, נָחָשׁ, עֵינָב (בכורות ל"ח):

או תבלל — (from בלל "to mingle") denotes anything that causes a mingling in the eye, e. g., a white line which extends from the white of the eye and intersects the סירא (the iris), which is the ring that encloses the black of the eye which is called prunelle in old French This white line intersects the circle and runs into the black (so that the white and the black of the eye mingle). The Targum rendering of תבלל is חילוז, connected in meaning with חלזון (a kind of worm); he translates it thus because that line resembles a worm. Thus, too, the Sages of Israel name it (the while line) among the blemishes of first-born animals: חלזון נחש עינב (worm, snake, wart) (cf. Bekhorot 38a,b).

גרב או ילפת. מִינֵי שְׁחִין הֵם; גָּרָב זוֹ הַחֶרֶס, שְׁחִין הַיָּבֵשׁ מִבִּפְנִים וּמִבַּחוּץ, יַלֶּפֶת הִיא חֲזָזִית הַמִּצְרִית, וְלָמָּה נִקְרֵאת יַלֶּפֶת? שֶׁמְּלַפֶּפֶת וְהוֹלֶכֶת עַד יוֹם הַמִּיתָה, וְהוּא לַח מִבַּחוּץ וְיָבֵשׁ מִבִּפְנִים, וּבְמָקוֹם אַחֵר קוֹרֵא לַגָּרָב שְׁחִין הַלַּח מִבַּחוּץ וְיָבֵשׁ מִבִּפְנִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "וּבַגָּרָב וּבֶחָרֶס" (דברים כ"ח), כְּשֶׁסָּמַךְ גָּרָב אֵצֶל חֶרֶס, קוֹרֵא לַיַּלֶּפֶת גָּרָב, וּכְשֶׁהוּא סָמוּךְ אֵצֶל יַלֶּפֶת, קוֹרֵא לַחֶרֶס גָּרָב, כָּךְ מְפֹרָשׁ בִּבְכוֹרוֹת (דף מ"א):

גרב וילפת — These are kinds of boil; גרב is identical with חרס (mentioned in Deuteronomy 28:27) — a boil which is dry both inside and on the surface. ילפת is identical with the Egyptian lichen, (חזזית) (Sifra, Emor, Section 3 15). Why is it called ילפת (root לפת “to embrace")? Because it continues to cling to the body until the day of death. It is wet on the surface and dry inside. In another passage, however, Scripture gives the name גרב to a boil which is wet on the surface and dry inside, as it is said (Deuteronomy 28:27) "[The Lord will smite thee…] ובגרב ובחרס”, where גרב necessarily denotes a wet boil since חרס (identical with חרש, potsherd) denotes the dry species. But the explanation is as follows: חרס always denotes the dry skin disease, ילפח always the wet one; as to גרב it depends: When Scripture mentions גרב together with חרס it is calling a ילפת by the term ,גרב and when it mentions it (גרב) together with ילפת (as is the case here) it is calling a חרס by the term גרב. Thus is it explained in Bekhorot 41a.

מרוח אשך. לְפִי הַתַּרְגּוּם מְרַס פַּחֲדִין, שֶׁפְּחָדָיו מְרֻסָּסִין — שֶׁבֵּיצִים שֶׁלּוֹ כְתוּתִין, פְּחָדִין כְּמוֹ "גִּידֵי פַחֲדָו יְשֹׂרָגוּ" (איוב מ'):

מרוח אשך, according to the Targum, מרס פחדין, which signifies one whose פחדין are מרוססין, i. e., one whose testicles are crushed. פחדין has the same meaning as (Job 40:17) “and the sinews of his stones (פחדיו) are wrapped together”.

כל איש אשר בו מום. לְרַבּוֹת שְׁאָר מוּמִין:

כל איש אשר בו מום NO MAN THAT HATH A BLEMISH… [SHALL COME NEAR] — This is intended to include in the prohibition (besides the blemishes expressly mentioned in vv. 18—20) also other bodily blemishes (Sifra, Emor, Chapter 3 1).

מום בו. בְּעוֹד מוּמוֹ בּוֹ פָּסוּל, הָא אִם עָבַר מוּמוֹ כָּשֵׁר (ספרא):

מום בו HE HATH A BLEMISH — These apparently redundant words imply: so long as he has the bodily blemish he is unfit for priestly service; (the translation is: מום בו while the blemish is in him, '‎לא יגש וכו‎ he shall not approach to offer); consequently, if his blemish disappears, he becomes again fit for it (Sifra, Emor, Chapter 3 6).

לחם אלהיו. כָּל מַאֲכָל קָרוּי לֶחֶם:

לחם אלהיו THE BREAD OF HIS LORD — any food is called לחם (cf. Rashi on v. 17).

מקדשי הקדשים. אֵלּוּ קָדְשֵׁי הַקֳּדָשִׁים:

מקדשי הקדשים OF THE MOST HOLY — These are what are technically known as קדשי קדשים — of them he may eat.

ומן הקדשים יאכל. אֵלּוּ קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים, וְאִם נֶאֶמְרוּ קָדְשֵׁי הַקֳּדָשִׁים לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים? אִם לֹא נֶאֱמַר, הָיִיתִי אוֹמֵר בְּקָדְשֵׁי הַקֳּדָשִׁים יֹאכַל בַּעַל מוּם, שֶׁמָּצִינוּ שֶׁהֻתְּרוּ לְזָר, שֶׁאָכַל מֹשֶׁה בְּשַׂר הַמִּלּוּאִים, אֲבָל בְּחָזֶה וְשׁוֹק שֶׁל קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים לֹא יֹאכַל, שֶׁלֹּא מָצִינוּ זָר חוֹלֵק בָּהֶן, לְכָךְ נֶאֶמְרוּ קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים, כָּךְ מְפֹרָשׁ בִּזְבָחִים (דף ק"א):

ומן הקדשים יאכל AND OF THE HOLY HE MAY EAT — these are what are technically known as קדשים קלים. But if קדשי קדשים are mentioned as being permitted to him as food, why are קדשים קלים also mentioned? Could this not be inferred by a conclusion a fortiori? But the explanation is as follows: If קדשים קלים were not expressly mentioned as being permitted, I might have said: of the sacrifices holy in the highest degree the priest with a bodily blemish may eat — because we find that these had on one occasion been permitted to be eaten even by a non-priest, for Moses (who was not a priest) ate the flesh of the installation offering (cf. Leviticus 8:29; and this was holy in the highest degree since Scripture continues there: “Seethe the flesh at the entrance of the appointed tent… etc., a law that only applies to קדשי קדשים) — but he (a priest who is בעל מום) must not eat of the breast and the shoulder of sacrifices holy in a minor degree, since we do not find that a non-priest ever took a share in them. On this account sacrifices holy in a minor degree are expressly stated as permitted to be eaten. Thus it is explained in Treatise Zevachim 101b (cf. also Sifra, Emor, Chapter 3 8-9).

אך אל הפרכת. לְהַזּוֹת שֶׁבַע הַזָּאוֹת שֶׁעַל הַפָּרֹכֶת.

אך אל הפרכת ONLY [HE SHALL NOT GO IN] UNTO THE PARTITION VEIL for the purpose of applying the seven sprinklings which are to be made upon the partition vail (cf. Leviticus 16:17).

ואל המזבח. הַחִיצוֹן; וּשְׁנֵיהֶם הֻצְרְכוּ לִכָּתֵב, וּמְפֹרָשׁ בְּתֹ"כֹּ:

ואל המזבח [NOR SHALL HE COME NIGH] UNTO THE ALTAR — i. e. the outer altar. Both (פרכת and מזבח) must be mentioned here and the reason is explained in Torath Cohanim (Sifra, Emor, Chapter 3 10).

ולא יחלל את מקדשי. שֶׁאִם עָבַד עֲבוֹדָתוֹ מְחֻלֶּלֶת לִפָּסֵל (ספרא):

ולא יחלל את מקדשי THAT HE PROFANE NOT WHAT IS HOLY TO ME — Consequently, if he performs the service it is profaned and thus becomes invalid (Sifra, Emor, Chapter 3 11).

וידבר משה. הַמִּצְוָה הַזֹּאת.

וידבר משה AND MOSES TOLD this command,

אל אהרן ואל בניו ואל כל בני ישראל. לְהַזְהִיר בֵּית דִּין עַל הַכֹּהֲנִים (עי' ספרא):

אל אהרן ואל בניו ואל כל בני ישראל UNTO AARON AND UNTO HIS SONS AND UNTO ALL THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL — He told it to the Israelites although they were not directly concerned with these commands in order to admonish the court regarding the priests (i. e. that the authorities should watch over the sanctity of the Sanctuary and prevent priests with a bodily blemish from officiating) (Sifra, Emor, Chapter 3 12).

וינזרו. אֵין נְזִירָה אֶלָּא פְרִישָׁה, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר "וַיִּנָּזֵר מֵאַחֲרַי" (יחזקאל י"ד), "נָזֹרוּ אָחוֹר" (ישעיהו א') — יִפְרְשׁוּ מִן הַקֳּדָשִׁים בִּימֵי טֻמְאָתָן (ספרא):

וינזרו THAT THEY KEEP AWAY [FROM THE HOLY THINGS etc.] — The term נזר always denotes “keeping aloof". Similarly it is said (Ezekiel 14:7) "and he separates himself (וינזר) from following Me”; (Isaiah 1:4) "They are gone away (נזורו) backward”. The meaning of this verse therefore is: they (the priests) shall keep aloof from the holy things during the time of their uncleanness (Sifra, Emor, Section 4 1).

וינזרו מקדשי בני ישראל, אשר הם מקדשים לי ולא יחללו את שם קדשי. סָרֵס הַמִּקְרָא וְדָרְשֵׁהוּ:

וינזרו מקדשי בני ישראל אשר הם מקדשים לי. ולא יחללו את שם קדשי — Invert the words of the verse in the order here set forth and explain it accordingly.

אשר הם מקדשים לי. לְרַבּוֹת קָדְשֵׁי כֹהֲנִים עַצְמָן:

אשר הם מקדשים לי WHICH THEY HALLOW UNTO ME — This is intended to include in the prohibition the holy things of the priests themselves (i. e. הם refers to אהרן ובניו not to ‎‎בני ישראל‎) (Sifra, Emor, Section 4 1).

כל איש אשר יקרב. אֵין קְרִיבָה זוֹ אֶלָּא אֲכִילָה, וְכֵן מָצִינוּ שֶׁנֶּאֶמְרָה אַזְהָרַת אֲכִילַת קָדָשִׁים בְּטֻמְאָה בִּלְשׁוֹן נְגִיעָה, "בְּכָל קֹדֶשׁ לֹא תִגָּע" (ויקרא י"ב), אַזְהָרָה לָאוֹכֵל, וּלְמָדוּהָ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ מִגְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה; וְאִאֶ"ל שֶׁחַיָּב עַל הַנְּגִיעָה, שֶׁהֲרֵי נֶאֱמַר כָּרֵת עַל הָאֲכִילָה בְּצַו אֶת אַהֲרֹן (ויקרא ז'), שְׁתֵּי כָּרֵתוֹת זוֹ אֵצֶל זוֹ, וְאִם עַל הַנְּגִיעָה חַיָּב, לֹא הֻצְרַךְ לְחַיְּבוֹ עַל הָאֲכִילָה וְכֵן נִדְרַשׁ בְּתֹ"כֹּ: וְכִי יֵשׁ נוֹגֵעַ חַיָּב? אִם כֵּן מַה תַּ"ל יִקְרַב? מִשֶּׁיִּכְשַׁר לִקָּרֵב, שֶׁאֵין חַיָּבִים עָלָיו מִשּׁוּם טֻמְאָה אֶלָּא אִ"כֵּ קָרְבוּ מַתִּירָיו (ספרא; זבחים מ"ה): וְאִ"תֹּ שָׁלוֹשׁ כָּרֵתוֹת בְּטֻמְאַת כֹּהֲנִים לָמָּה, כְּבָר נִדְרְשׁוּ בְּמַסֶּכֶת שְׁבוּעוֹת (דף ז'), אַחַת לִכְלָל וְאַחַת לִפְרָט וְכוּ':

‎כל איש אשר יקרב WHOSOEVER HE BE THAT GOETH UNTO [THE HOLY THINGS… SHALL BE CUT OFF etc.] — This “approaching" unto the holy things signifies nothing else but eating of them. Similarly we find that the prohibition of eating holy things in a state of uncleanness is expressed by the term נגע, (which means, as does קרב, “approaching”): (Leviticus 12:4) “she shall approach near to nothing that is holy" — which is explained as a prohibition addressed to one who would eat of the holy things (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 12:4). And our Rabbis derived it (the fact that לא תגע means: she shall not eat) from a verbal analogy. It is indeed impossible to say that one is punishable for touching holy things in a state of uncleanness, because the penalty of excision for eating holy things in such a state is mentioned in the section commencing צו את אהרן (Leviticus 7:20, 21) — twice is the punishment of כרת mentioned there, one immediately after the other; and if one really becomes liable to punishment for the mere touching of holy things it is unnecessary to pronounce him liable to punishment for eating them! In this sense also is it (our passage) expounded in Torath Cohanim (Sifra, Emor, Section 4 7): But is a priest who merely touches holy things when he is unclean really liable to the punishment of excision? Surely not, since Scripture expressly states in the following verse that an unclean priest who eats of the holy things is liable to excision and this latter statement would be unnecessary since eating without touching is impossible. But if this be so, why does Scripture use the term יקרב and not יאכל which means "eating”? It is in order to intimate that this law applies only when an unclean priest eats of it after it becomes fit לקרב, “to be offered” — that one does not become liable on account of his uncleanness until its מתירין (its “permitting portions”) have been offered, and he then eats of it. And if you ask, “Why are three mentions of the כרת-punishment (Leviticus 7:21 and here) necessary in respect to priestly uncleanness? then I reply, they have already been interpreted in Treatise Shevuot 7a, one as being intended as a generalisation, the other as a specification, etc. (see Rashi on Leviticus 7:20).

וטמאתו עליו. וְטֻמְאַת הָאָדָם עָלָיו, יָכוֹל בַּבָּשָׂר הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר — וְטֻמְאָתוֹ שֶׁל בָּשָׂר עָלָיו — וּבְטָהוֹר שֶׁאָכַל אֶת הַטָּמֵא הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר, עַל כָּרְחֲךָ מִמַּשְׁמָעוֹ אַתָּה לָמֵד — בְּמִי שֶׁטֻּמְאָתוֹ פּוֹרַחַת מִמֶּנּוּ הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר, וְזֶהוּ הָאָדָם שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ טָהֳרָה בִּטְבִילָה (ספרא):

וטומאתו עליו means, AND THE MAN'S UNCLEANNESS IS UPON HIM (the first word meaning "and his uncleanness”). I might, however, think that Scripture is speaking of the flesh — "the uncleanness of the flesh is upon it” (the first word meaning “and its uncleanness, the word בשר being implied in the term הקדשים that precedes) and that Scripture is thus speaking of a clean person who ate holy things which have become unclean! You must needs admit that from what is implied in it (in the phrase) you must learn that Scripture is speaking of one whose state of uncleanness can fly (pass) away therefrom (since the phrase implies: “whilst the טומאה is still present", presupposing that there is a possibility of the טומאה passing away), and this can only refer to a human being who has a means of purification through immersion in a ritual bath whilst unclean food can never again become clean (Sifra, Emor, Section 4 8; Zevachim 43b).

ונכרתה. יָכוֹל מִצַּד זֶה לְצַד זֶה — יִכָּרֵת מִמְּקוֹמוֹ וְיִתְיַשֵּׁב בְּמָקוֹם אַחֵר — תַּ"ל אני ה', בְּכָל מָקוֹם אֲנִי (שם):

ונכרתה [THAT SOUL] SHALL BE CUT OFF — I might think that this implies merely that he will be removed from one region (lit., side) to another region — that he will be cut off from his native place but may settle down in another place! Scripture however states, “[that soul shall be cut off from My presence] I am the Lord” — I am everywhere (Sifra, Emor, Section 4 6; cf. Rashi on Exodus 12:15.)

מזרע אהרן. אין לי אלא זרעו, גופו מנין, תלמוד לומר והוא צרוע, שיכול הואיל ומקריב אונן יקריב צרוע וזב, תלמוד לומר והוא:

1 Among Aaron’s offspring: I know only that Aaron’s offspring. How do I know that he himself is also included]? Talmud says, “if he has tzara’ath ”; for one might think that since he is allowed to offer up holy sacrifices when he is an onen , he would also be allowed to offer them up if he has tzara’ath or if he had a discharge. Talmud, therefore, says, “if he…”

עד אשר יטהר. ביאת השמש, או אינו אלא טבילה, נאמר כאן וטהר, ונאמר למטה וטהר (פסוק ז) ובא השמש וטהר, מה להלן ביאת שמש, אף כאן ביאת שמש:

2. Until he cleanses himself: At sunset , or, perhaps, it means only immersion. It says here, וְטָהֵר, and it says below (verse 7), וְטָהֵר, Just as there it means sunset, here too, it means sunset.

בכל טמא נפש. בְּמִי שֶׁנִּטְמָא בְמֵת:

בכל טמא נפש [AND WHOSO TOUCHETH] ANY טמא נפש — This means: who touches a person who has become defiled by a corpse.

בכל שרץ אשר יטמא לו. בְּשִׁעוּר הָרָאוּי לְטַמֵּא — בְּכָעֲדָשָׁה (חגיגה י"א):

בכל שרץ אשר יטמא לו [OR WHOSOEVER TOUCHETH] ANY PROLIFIC CREATURE BECAUSE OF WHICH (לו) HE MAY BE MADE UNCLEAN — This means: who touches any שרץ of the minimum size that is capable of communicating uncleanness, viz., a particle of the size of a lentil (cf. Sifra, Emor, Chapter 4 4; Chagigah 11a).

או באדם. בְּמֵת:

או באדם OR A HUMAN BEING — a dead person (Sifra, Emor, Chapter 4 4).

אשר יטמא לו. בְּשִׁעוּרוֹ לְטַמֵּא וְזֶהוּ כַּזַּיִת (אהלות פ"ב):

אשר יטמא לו BY WHOM HE MAY BE MADE UNCLEAN - i. e. by touching the minimum size of a portion of the dead person which is capable of transmitting uncleanness, and this is, a portion as large as an olive (Mishnah Oholot 2:1).

לכל טמאתו. לְרַבּוֹת נוֹגֵעַ בְּזָב וְזָבָה נִדָּה וְיוֹלֶדֶת:

לכל טמאתו WHATSOEVER UNCLEANNESS HE HATH — This is intended to include in the prohibition of eating holy things one who has touched a man or a woman who has an issue, or who has touched a נדה or a woman in childbirth (Sifra, Emor, Chapter 4 4).

נפש אשר תגע בו. בְּאֶחָד מִן הַטְּמֵאִים הַלָלוּ:

נפש אשר תגע בו THE SOUL WHICH HATH TOUCHED IT — i. e. who touches any one of these unclean persons or things (enumerated in the second half of v. 4 and in v. 5).

ואחר יאכל מן הקדשים. נִדְרֶשֶׁת בִּיבָמוֹת (דף ע"ד), בִּתְרוּמָה שֶׁמֻּתָּר לְאָכְלָהּ בְּהַעֲרֵב הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ:

ואחר יאכל מן הקדשים [AND WHEN THE SUN IS DOWN HE SHALL BE CLEAN] AND MAY AFTERWARDS EAT OF HOLY THINGS — This is interpreted in Treatise Jebamoth (74b) to have reference to the heave-offering (not to holy things of every description): that he (a priest who was unclean and has bathed) is permitted to eat it as soon as the sun has set.

מן הקדשים. וְלֹא כָל הַקֳּדָשִׁים:

מן הקדשים accordingly means: some OF THE HOLY THINGS, but not all holy things (the word מן having a partitive meaning: “some of”).

נבלה וטרפה לא יאכל לטמאה בה. לְעִנְיַן הַטֻּמְאָה הִזְהִיר כָּאן, שֶׁאִם אָכַל נִבְלַת עוֹף טָהוֹר שֶׁאֵין לָהּ טֻמְאַת מַגָּע וּמַשָּׂא אֶלָּא טֻמְאַת אֲכִילָה בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה, אָסוּר לֶאֱכֹל בַּקֳּדָשִׁים; וְצָרִיךְ לוֹמַר "וּטְרֵפָה" — מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּמִינוֹ טְרֵפָה, יָצָא נִבְלַת עוֹף טָמֵא שֶׁאֵין בְּמִינוֹ טְרֵפָה:

נבלה וטרפה לא יאכל לטמאה בה CARRION, OR THAT WHICH IS TORN HE SHALL NOT EAT TO BECOME UNCLEAN THEREBY — It is with regard to the defilement that Scripture lays down this prohibition: that if he (the priest) eats the carrion of a clean bird — which has no defiling effect through being touched or carried but has a defiling effect only when eaten, as soon as it is in the gullet — he is forbidden to eat holy things (Sifra, Acharei Mot, Chapter 12 6). And it was necessary for Scripture to mention טרפה also, in order to define what נבלה is here intended, viz., one that can have a טרפה amongst the individuals of its class: therefore the נבלה of an unclean bird is excluded, for in its class a טרפה can never occur (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 17:15).

ושמרו את משמרתי. מִלֶּאֱכֹל תְּרוּמָה בְּטֻמְאַת הַגּוּף (סנהדרין פ"ג):

ושמרו את משמרתי THEY SHALL THEREFORE KEEP MY CHARGE — not to eat the heave-offering (as mentioned in v. 7) whilst they are in a state of bodily uncleanness (Sanhedrin 83a).

ומתו בו. לִמְּדָנוּ שֶׁהִיא מִיתָה בִידֵי שָׁמָיִם (שם):

ומתו בו LEST THEY DIE THEREBY — This phrase teaches us that this means death through Heaven (not through the sentence of the court) (cf. Sanhedrin 83a).

לא יאכל קדש. בִּתְרוּמָה הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר, שֶׁכָּל הָעִנְיָן דִּבֵּר בָּהּ:

לא יאכל קדש [THERE SHALL] NO [LAYMAN] EAT OF THE HOLY THINGS — Scripture is speaking here of the heave-offering (i. e., the word קדש means here תרומה only, and not any holy food) because the whole section (cf. Rashi on v. 7 and 9) is speaking of this.

תושב כהן ושכיר. תּוֹשָׁבוֹ שֶׁל כֹּהֵן וּשְׂכִירוֹ, לְפִיכָךְ "תּוֹשַׁב" זֶה נָקוּד פַּתָּח, לְפִי שֶׁהוּא דָּבוּק; וְאֵיזֶהוּ תּוֹשָׁב? זֶה נִרְצָע שֶׁהוּא קָנוּי לוֹ עַד הַיּוֹבֵל, וְאֵיזֶהוּ שָֹכִיר? זֶה קָנוּי קִנְיַן שָׁנִים שֶׁיּוֹצֵא בְשֵׁשׁ, בָּא הַכָּתוּב וְלִמֶּדְךָ כָּאן שֶׁאֵין גּוּפוֹ קָנוּי לַאֲדוֹנָיו לֶאֱכֹל בִּתְרוּמָתוֹ (ספרא; יבמות ע'):

תושב כהן ושכיר A SOJOURNER WITH THE PRIEST OR A HIRED SERVANT [SHALL NOT EAT OF THE HOLY THINGS] — These words mean: the תושב of a כהן and his שכיר (not a כהן who is a תושב or a שכיר); on this account this word תושב here is punctuated with a Patach, because it is in the construct state. What is a תושב? One (a Hebrew servant) whose ear has been pierced (cf. Exodus 21:6), who thereby becomes his (the master’s) possession until the Jubilee year. And what is a שכיר? One (a Hebrew servant) who has been acquired as his possession for a limited number of years only — who goes free at the end of six years (cf. Exodus 21:2). Scripture intends to teach you here that it is not his body (that of the תושב or the שכיר), but only his labour for a term of years that has been acquired by his master that he should become entitled to eat of his heave-offering (as is the case with the קנין כספו, with “a person obtained as a property with money”, mentioned in the next verse) (Sifra, Emor, Section 5 17; Yevamot 70b).

וכהן כי יקנה נפש. עֶבֶד כְּנַעֲנִי שֶׁקָּנוּי לְגוּפוֹ:

וכהן כי יקנה נפש BUT IF THE PRIEST BUY ANY SOUL… [HE MAY EAT OF IT] — This refers to a Canaanitish servant who has been acquired even in respect to his body (not only as regards his work).

ויליד ביתו. אֵלּוּ בְנֵי הַשְּׁפָחוֹת; וְאֵשֶׁת כֹּהֵן אוֹכֶלֶת בִּתְרוּמָה מִן הַמִּקְרָא הַזֶּה, שֶׁאַף הִיא קִנְיַן כַּסְפּוֹ, וְעוֹד לָמֵד מִמִּקְרָא אַחֵר (במדבר י"ח), כָּל טָהוֹר בְּבֵיתְךָ וְגוֹ' בְּסִפְרֵי:

ויליד ביתו AND THEY THAT ARE BORN IN HIS HOUSE — This refers to the children of his maid-servants. A priest's wife may eat תרומה as may be derived from this verse, for she, too, is “an acquisition obtained by his money” (Ketuvot 57b; cf. Mishna Kiddushin 1:1… ‎'האשה נקנית בכסף וכו‎‎‎, one of the ways in which a marriage may be contracted is by the passing of money or its equivalent from the man to the woman. A wife is therefore a קנין כסף). But it may also be derived from another verse (Numbers 18:11) "[the heave-offering…] everyone that is clean in thy house may eat of it”. Thus is it expounded in Sifrei Bamidbar 117 2.

לאיש זר. לְלֵוִי וְיִשְׂרָאֵל (ספרא):

לאיש זר TO A LAYMAN — to a Levite or an ordinary Israelite (i. e. to any non-priest) (Sifra, Emor, Section 5 7).

אלמנה וגרושה. מִן הָאִישׁ הַזָּר:

אלמנה וגרושה [BUT IF A PRIEST'S DAUGHTER BE] A WIDOW OR DIVORCED WIFE of the layman mentioned in the preceding verse,

וזרע אין לה. מִמֶּנּוּ:

וזרע אין לה AND SHE HATH NO DESCENDANTS — from him (from the layman) (Sifra; Yevamot 87a),

ושבה. הָא אִם יֵשׁ לָהּ זֶרַע מִמֶּנּוּ, אֲסוּרָה בִתְרוּמָה כָּל זְמַן שֶׁהַזֶּרַע קַיָּם (יבמות ע"ז):

ושבה THEN SHE MAY RETURN [UNTO HER FATHER'S HOUSE AS IN HER YOUTH AND MAY EAT OF HER FATHER’S BREAD] — if, however, she has descendants from him she is forbidden to eat as long as the descendants (cf. Yevamot 87a) are alive.

וכל זר לא יאכל בו. לֹא בָא אֶלָּא לְהוֹצִיא אֶת הָאוֹנֵן — שֶׁמֻּתָּר בִּתְרוּמָה, זָרוּת אָמַרְתִּי לְךָ וְלֹא אֲנִינוּת (שם שם ס"ח):

וכל זר לא יאכל בו BUT THERE SHALL NO LAYMAN EAT THEREOF — The repetition of the prohibition already mentioned in v. 10 intends nothing else than to exclude from it the אונן — i. e. that he (the אונן) is permitted to eat תרומה. [Scripture, as it were, says here:] The status of being a non-priest, I tell you, debars one from eating תרומה but not that of being an אונן (Yevamot 68b).

כי יאכל קדש. תְּרוּמָה:

כי יאכל קדש AND IF [A MAN] EAT OF HOLY THINGS — the heave-offering.

ונתן לכהן את הקדש. דָּבָר הָרָאוּי לִהְיוֹת קֹדֶשׁ, שֶׁאֵינוֹ פוֹרֵעַ לוֹ מָעוֹת, אֶלָּא פֵּרוֹת שֶׁל חֻלִּין וְהֵן נַעֲשִֹין תְּרוּמָה (פסחים ל"ב):

ונתן לכהן את הקדש THEN SHALL HE GIVE UNTO THE PRIEST THE קדש — i. e. a thing capable of becoming קדש, thus implying that he does not pay him money but fruits of a non-sacred character (חולין), which then become תרומה (cf. Sifra, Emor, Chapter 6 5; Pesachim 32b).

ולא יחללו וגו'. לְהַאֲכִילָם לְזָרִים:

'‎ולא יחוללו וגו‎‎ AND THEY SHALL NOT PROFANE [THE HOLY THINGS OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL] — by giving them to non-priests to eat of them.

והשיאו אותם. אֶת עַצְמָם יִטְעֲנוּ עָוֹן באכלם את קדשיהם שֶׁהֻבְדְּלוּ לְשֵׁם תְּרוּמָה, וְקָדְשׁוּ וְנֶאֶסְרוּ עֲלֵיהֶן; וְאֻנְקְלוֹס שֶׁתִּרְגֵּם "בְּמֵיכָלְהוֹן בְּסוֹאֲבָא", שֶׁלֹּא לְצֹרֶךְ תִּרְגְּמוֹ כֵן:

והשיאו אותם means, and they (the priests) would burden themselves with sin, באכלם את קדשיהם WHEN THEY (the non-priests) EAT THEIR HOLY THINGS which have been set apart for the purpose of heave-offering and have thereby become holy and forbidden to them. [Onkelos who translated באכלם את קדשיהם by “when they (the priests) eat them in their uncleanness” has translated it thus quite unnecessarily] (But cf. Rashi on Sanhedrin 90b).

והשיאו אותם. זֶה אֶחָד מִשְּׁלוֹשָׁה אֶתִים שֶׁהָיָה רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל דּוֹרֵשׁ בַּתּוֹרָה שֶׁמְּדַבְּרִים בָּאָדָם עַצְמוֹ, וְכֵן "בְּיוֹם מְלֹאת יְמֵי נִזְרוֹ יָבִיא אֹתוֹ" (במדבר ו') — הוּא יָבִיא אֶת עַצְמוֹ, וְכֵן "וַיִּקְבֹּר אֹתוֹ בַגַּי" (דברים ל"ד) — הוּא קָבַר אֶת עַצְמוֹ, כָּךְ נִדְרָשׁ בְּסִפְרֵי:

והשיאו אותם — This (the word אותם) is one of the three cases of את with a pronominal suffix occurring in the Torah which R. Ishmael explained as speaking of (referring to) the person himself who is the subject of the sentence (i. e. as being reflexive and not accusative pronouns). In the same sense did he explain (Numbers 4:13) “[And this is the law of the Nazarite] when the days of his Nazaritehood are fulfilled, יביא אותו [to the entrance of the appointed tent]” as meaning: he shall bring himself (i. e. present himself) to the entrance etc. Similarly he explained (Deuteronomy 34:6) “ויקבור אותו in the glen” as meaning: he (Moses) buried himself (i. e. he went into a cave and died there cf. Avot 5:9 and יד משה on Shemot Rabbah 10). Thus is it explained in the Sifrei Bamidbar 32 (on Numbers 6:3).