web analytics
April 18, 2015 / 29 Nisan, 5775
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post


Home » Judaism » Parsha »

Why Were The Men Tamei?

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

This column is dedicated to the refuah sheleimah of Shlomo Eliezer ben Chaya Sarah Elka.

In this week’s parshah we read about the individuals who were tamei and thus could not bring the korban Pesach. They approached Moshe Rabbeinu and asked him whether there was anything they could do to bring the korban. Ultimately, Hashem told Moshe that they should bring a korban a month after Pesach, on the 14th of Iyar.

The wording of the pasuk that describes when they first came before Moshe is: “Vayomeru ha’anashim ha’heimah – and these men spoke.” The Sifri says that we derive from the word “ha’heimah – these” that only the one with the question should ask the question. Seemingly, the Sifri is requiring that one ask a question himself; one should not send the question through another person. However, this explanation is very difficult to understand. Is one not allowed to send a question through another person?

The Panim Yafos explains the Sifri with the following different approach: these men were tamei because, according to one opinion, they were carrying Yosef’s aron. The Gemara in Shabbos 93a says that when several people carry a zav only the one who is holding the majority of the zav becomes tamei. The others remain tahor. This is because they are merely aiding him in the act of carrying, which does not render one tamei. But in this case it was not clear who was carrying the majority of the aron. Therefore it was a safek as to which one of the men was tamei.

Generally, when there is a safek as to which one of several men (more than three) became tamei the halacha states that they should all be tahor. This is based on the halacha of safek tumah, b’rishus ha’rabim tahor. If a safek regarding tumah occurs in a place where there are three or more people, we render the safek tahor. Therefore these men should have been tahor, since the safek occurred in a place where there were more than three people. However, since these men all came together to ask about their status, Moshe Rabbeinu had to rule that they were tamei. The reason for this: had each person come individually to ask about his status, all would have been deemed tahor; when all of the men ask about their status together, they must all be rendered tamei. This is due to the fact that since one of them is surely tamei, we cannot render each one as tahor when they ask together. Thus, they must all be rendered as tamei misafek.

This halacha is drawn from the halacha of shnei sheveilim (two paths), in which one has tumah and the other does not. If two people walk the other down one path, they will both be portrayed as tahor. However, if both come to ask at the same time, they will be tamei. This is because they cannot both be tahor. Thus, they are both deemed tamei misafek.

However, Tosfos in Pesachim 10a says that the halacha that we render them tamei when they come to ask at the same time is only mi’de’rabbanan. Mi’de’oraisa, they would both be classified as tahor. Hence, the explanation of the Panim Yafos is difficult to understand since we are discussing a time period before the rabbanan decreed this halacha. So in Moshe Rabbeinu’s time, the halacha should have been that they were all tahor since they only had de’oraisa-level halachos.

I would like to suggest that although the time period that we are discussing is prior to the time that the rabbanan issued their decree, perhaps Moshe Rabbeinu was aware that one day this would become a rabbinic decree and thus Moshe adhered to it. We find a similar concept in Tosafos (Kiddushin 38a) whereby Tosfos quotes the Yerushalmi that asks why, when the bnei Yisrael entered Eretz Yisrael, they could not eat matzah made from chadash and apply the halacha of assei, doche lo sa’assei. Tosfos answers that there is a rabbinic decree prohibiting this because if one will eat one k’zayis, he may come to eat a second k’zayis. We cannot, therefore, apply the halacha of assei, doche lo sa’assei.

This time period was also before the rabbanan decreed their halachos; yet Tosfos seems to say that the bnei Yisrael nonetheless adhered to their decrees. This can be explained due to the belief that all of the decrees that the rabbanan made were given at Har Sinai – except that they were given as de’rabbanan halachos, and not to be treated the same as de’oraisa halachos. For example, in the case of a safek, a de’oraisa is treated stringently and a de’rabbanan is treated leniently.

Perhaps Moshe Rabbeinu took into consideration the fact that one day there would be a decree mi’de’rabbanan regarding when all the people come to ask about their tumah status, and thus he ruled that they were all tamei.

About the Author: For questions or comments, e-mail RabbiRFuchs@gmail.com.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “Why Were The Men Tamei?”

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
Daniel Lubetzky  president of V15 and CEO of Kind "healthy" bars
No Victory for V15 and Not Healthy ‘Healthy’ Snack Bars
Latest Judaism Stories
Hertzberg-041715

Lincoln was not a perfect man. But he rose above his imperfections to do what he thought was right not matter the obstacles.

Arch of Titus

Adon Olam: An Erev Shabbat Musical Interlude Courtesy of David Herman

Daf-Yomi-logo

Oh My, It’s Copper!
‘…And One Who Is A Coppersmith’
(Kethubboth 77a)

Grunfeld-Raphael-logo

The omer sacrifice of loose barley flour was more fitting for animal consumption than human consumption and symbolizes the depths to which the Jewish slaves had sunk.

Question: If Abraham was commanded to circumcise his descendants on the eighth day, why do Arabs – who claim to descend from Abraham through Yishmael – wait until their children are 13 to circumcise them? I am aware that this is a matter of little consequence to our people. Nevertheless, this inconsistency is one that piques my curiosity.

M. Goldman
(Via E-mail)

When Chazal call not eating treif food a chok, that refers to how it functions.

His mother called “Yoni, Yoni!” Her eyes, a moment earlier dark with pain, shone with joy and hope

Kashrut reminds us that in the end, God is the arbiter of right and wrong.

In a cab with Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach & Rav Elayshiv discussing if/when to say tefillas haderech

The successful student listens more than speaks out; wants his ideas critiqued, not just appreciated

Why would it not be sufficient to simply state lehoros from which we derive that in such a state one may not issue any psak?

What do we learn about overcoming loss from the argument between Moses and Aaron’s remaining 2 sons?

Each of the unique roles attributed to Moshe share the common theme that they require of and grant higher sanctity to the individual filling the role.

Because of the way the piece of my finger had been severed, the doctors at the hospital were not able to reattach it. They told me I’d have to see a specialist.

“The problem is that the sum total is listed is $17,000. However, when you add the sums mentioned, it is clear that the total of $17,000 is an error. Thus, Mr. Broyer owes me $18,000, not $17,000.”

More Articles from Rabbi Raphael Fuchs
Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

Why would it not be sufficient to simply state lehoros from which we derive that in such a state one may not issue any psak?

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

The Netziv answered that there is a difference between a piece of bread that was cut already in front of you, and one that was cut from beforehand.

Why is it necessary to invite people to eat from the korban Pesach?

The Ran asks why the Gemara concludes that since we are unsure which two of the four we must recline for, that we must recline for all four.

The Chasam Sofer answers that one of only prohibited from wearing a garment that contains shatnez if he does so while wearing the garment for pleasure purposes.

The Aruch Laner asks: How can Rashi say that the third Beis Hamikdash will descend as fire from heaven when every Jew prays several times a day for the rebuilding of the Beis Hamikdash?

The Ohr Hachayim rules that one may not manipulate the system; rather he must state his opinion as he see the ruling in the case; not as he would like the outcome of the verdict to become.

He suggests that the general admonition only dictates that a father may not actively enable his son to perform an aveirah.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/parsha/why-were-the-men-tamei/2013/05/22/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: