Pshat — and Drash — Reflect Halachah LeSha’ah
צַו אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וִישַׁלְּחוּ מִן הַמַּחֲנֶה כָּל צָרוּעַ וְכָל זָב וְכֹל טָמֵא לָנָפֶשׁ.
Command B’nei Yisrael, and they shall send forth from the Camp anyone with tzoraat, any zav, and anyone contaminated by contact with the deceased. (Bamidbar 5:2)
In his Introduction to Chumash Bamidbar, the Seforno discusses the reason behind the inclusion of certain parshiyot specifically in this Chumash; among them, the parsha of sending those who are tamei out of the Camp:
The intention was that B’nei Yisrael should be able to enter Eretz Yisrael immediately and without the need for the use of weapons. In order to enable them to be deserving of this, (Hashem) arranged the watches of Kohanim and Levi’im,[1] and removed all those who were tamei from their camps.
According to the Seforno, the reason why this parsha is written in Chumash Bamidbar is that although the mitzvah to send those who are tamei out of the Camp applies ledorot — for future generations as well, nonetheless, it had a special significance for B’nei Yisrael in the Midbar as a prelude to entering Eretz Yisrael.
Pshat Reflects Halachah LeSha’ah
The Netziv, in the Haamek Davar (Bamidbar 5:2), takes this idea one step further. Not only was there an additional element in sending out those who are tamei during the period of the Midbar, but this also expressed itself in the scope of the requirement at that time. To understand how, let us consider the three Machanot and the respective requirements to distance those who are tamei from them. The three Machanot are:
- Machaneh Shechinah: The area of the Mishkan[2]
- Machaneh Levi’ah: The area surrounding the Mishkan where the Levi’im were encamped.[3]
- Machaneh Yisrael: The area surrounding these first two Machanot, were B’nei Yisrael were encamped.[4]
The Gemara (Pesachim 67a) derives through midrash halachah that the three types of tamei individuals mentioned in our pasuk differ in terms of the Machaneh from which they must be sent out:
- A tzarua must be sent out of all three Machanot, even Machaneh Yisrael.
- A zav must be sent out of Machaneh Shechinah and Machaneh Levi’ah, but may remain in Machaneh Yisrael.
- One who is tamei due to contact with a corpse need only be sent out from Machaneh Shechinah, but may remain in Machaneh Levi’ah or Yisrael.
In other words, in spite of the fact that the pshat of the pasuk seems to indicate that all three types of tamei people are sent out of all three Machanot, the halachah states that this is not the case; rather, the prohibited areas will be dependent on the type of tumah which affects the individual.
However, the Netziv explains that while the above distinctions apply ledorot (in subsequent generations), nonetheless, during the period that B’nei Yisrael were in the Midbar, all three categories of tamei people were indeed sent out from all three Machanot — kipshuto!
The elevated quality of the way B’nei Yisrael were encamped around the Mishkan required that those who were tamei would be distanced from the Machaneh beyond what the halachah ledorot would require. This was, perhaps, due to their being about to enter Eretz Yisrael, which required special zechuyot, as the words of the Seforno (quoted earlier) seem to indicate. Alternatively, perhaps it was an expression of the elevated status of these Machanot in the Midbar generally, similar to the words of the Seforno which we have quoted elsewhere who states that the madreigah of the Mishkan on any given day in the Midbar was equivalent to the madreigah of the Beit Hamikdash on Yom Kippur ledorot![5]
At any rate, whatever way we understand the reason behind it, we have before us a classic example of an idea we have discussed numerous times throughout this sefer,[6] namely, that the divergence between the pshat and the drash is often a reflection of the fact that the drash derives the halachah ledorot, while the pshat expresses the halachah lesha’ah.
However, as we will see, in this instance the Netziv takes the discussion one stage further, and explains how halachah lesha’ah will complete our understanding in the realm of drash as well.
Midrash Halachah and the Extra “כל”
The Gemara (Pesachim 67a) discusses the three terms mentioned in our pasuk: “כָּל צָרוּעַ וְכָל זָב וְכֹל טָמֵא לָנָפֶשׁ.” According to the principles of drash, the word “כל” is always taken as including something beyond that which has been mentioned explicitly. Thus, for example, in our case, the words “כָל זָב” include sending out a “bal keri,” and the words “כֹל טָמֵא לָנָפֶשׁ” include one who came into contact with a sheretz. The question remains: what is to be included by the word כל in the first phrase, “כָּל צָרוּעַ”? There doesn’t seem to be an extra category of metzora that could be included. To this the Gemara responds:
איידי דכתיב כל זב כתיב נמי כל צרוע
Having written “every zav,” (the pasuk) writes also “every tzarua.”
The answer of the Gemara is quite remarkable, and represents a rare — if not unique — phenomenon in the words of Chazal. The idea of “איידי” means that although we do not derive any halachah from this word, it was nonetheless included for purposes of preserving symmetry. Having mentioned the word “כל” with reference to the two other types of tamei individuals — from which we do derive extra halachot, it is written with the third as well — even though we do not derive any halachah from it! What is so unusual here is that the idea of preserving symmetry is one which would seem to belong entirely to the realm of pshat, seeing as it relates to matters such as language, form, and syntax. To find this idea being applied in the realm of drash is quite a chiddush indeed!
The Netziv, however, maintains that being mindful of the idea that the halachah lesha’ah may have been different will allow us to “complete” the drash and find a category which is included by the “כל” written by tzarua (Haamek Davar, ibid.):
It appears that even though this parsha is stated for that time as well as for future times, nonetheless, it differed in its application at that time from its application in subsequent generations. For (in subsequent generations) they were only required to send those metzora’im who are tamei, while a metzora who is tahor does not need to be sent out. However, the metzora’im of that generation included those who contracted tzoraat before Matan Torah, in which case they were tahor, as the Mishnah teaches in Masechet Nega’im in the beginning of Perek 7[7] … nonetheless, in that generation, they were commanded to send out “כָּל צָרוּעַ — every tzarua.”
Thus, the (inclusive) connotation of the term “כָּל צָרוּעַ” is fully resolved in terms of the halachah as it related to that time. It is only with reference to subsequent generations that it was necessary to invoke the idea of “איידי.”
Resonance in the Rishonim
We have seen from the Gemara in Pesachim that the Torah may write the word “כל” even when there is no halachah to be derived from it in order to preserve symmetry within the pasuk. Let us conclude this discussion by referring to one of the Rishonim who applies this idea to a pasuk elsewhere, even though this was not mentioned there by Chazal themselves. The pasuk in the first parsha of Shema (Devarim 6:5) reads:
וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכָל לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל נַפְשְׁךָ וּבְכָל מְאֹדֶךָ
You shall love Hashem, your God, with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your resources.”
The Ramban (Devarim, ibid.) refers to the drashah of Chazal (Mishnah Berachot, perek 9, Mishnah 5) on the words “בְּכָל נַפְשְׁךָ” as meaning “even if He takes your life,” i.e., even if it involves giving up your life. Ramban notes that according to this approach, whereas the first and third phrases require the word “כל,” i.e. to teach that one should love Hashem with all — not half — of his heart, and with all — not half — of his resources, the middle phrase does not require the word “כל.” Since there is no such thing as “half a nefesh,” the use of the word “נפשך” alone denotes even if one needs to give up his life! However, Ramban explains:
Since it said “בכל לבבך” and “בכל מאדך,” it also said “בכל נפשך.”
In other words, since it was necessary to write the word “כל” with reference to the first and third cases, as there lessons to be derived therefrom, it wrote it in the middle case as well. This peirush of the Ramban is an application of the idea of “איידי” to the words of the Torah, which is clearly sourced in the Gemara Pesachim quoted above, commenting on our pasuk.[8]
B’virkat Chag Sameach!
[1] As described in Bamidbar Perek 4.
[2] [In Eretz Yisrael, this Machaneh corresponds to the Courtyard of the Beit Hamikdash.]
[3] [In Eretz Yisrael, this Machaneh corresponds to Har HaBayit].
[4] [In Eretz Yisrael, this Machaneh corresponds to the (walled) city of Yerushalayim.]
[5] See Parshat Acharei-Mot, Chapter 66.
[6] See e.g. Parshat Acharei-Mot ibid.
[7] [In which case, according to the standards of halachah ledorot, these metzora’im would not need to be sent out of the Machaneh.].
[8] In an alternative explanation, the Ramban suggests that the word “כל” is necessary for the middle case as well, since the word “נפשך” by itself could be taken as referring to suffering, or the loss of a limb, but not the loss of life itself.