Rashi on TanakhLeviticus 13

A spot of intense whiteness or an off-white spot, etc. These are the names of the skin-eruptions, [each] whiter than the other.

A snow-white spot. Bright spots, taie in Old French, and so [too the word בָּהִיר in the verse] “bright in the heavens.”

To Aharon, etc. It is a Scriptural decree, that [the declaration] of the impurity of skin-eruptions and their purification is only by authority of a kohein.

and [if] the hair in the skin-eruption has turned white. At first black, it turned to white within the skin-eruption; the mininum [amount of] hair is two [individual hairs].

Deeper than the skin of his body. Every [mark of] white appearance [seems] deeper [than the surrounding skin], as the appearance [of anything lit by] the sun is deeper than the shadow.

And declare him to be unclean. He must say to him: You are unclean,” for a white hair is a sign of uncleanness. [This is] a Scriptural decree.

And it does not appear deeper than the skin. I do not know its [proper] interpretation.

Shall confine. He confines him to one house, and he may not be seen until the end of the week, [at which point] the signs will prove [his status].

Its hue. Its appearance and original size.

And confine him . . . a second time. Thus, if it spread during the first week [of confinement], he is definitely impure.

Became dimmer. Became dimmer than its [original] appearance; thus if its appearance remained unchanged or it spread, he is [ritually] impure.

It is [merely] a white discoloration. [מִסְפַּחַת is] the name of a [ritually] clean skin eruption.

He shall wash his garments and he will be cleansed. Since he required confinement [at one time], he is considered unclean [in some sense], and requires immersion [in a מִקְוֶה].

The kohein shall declare him unclean. And from [the time] he declared him unclean, he is definitely [unclean], and requires birds and shaving and a sacrifice as mentioned in the parashoh of “ זאת תִּהְיֶה .”

It is tzora’as — this white discoloration.

Tzora’as. [This noun] is of feminine gender, נֶגַּע [= “skin eruption, mark”] is masculine.

Or healthy. Sainement in Old French — part of the whiteness within the intensely white spot [turned] to the appearance of flesh. This too is a sign of uncleanness — white hair without healthy [flesh], as well as healthy [flesh] without white hair; and even though healthy [flesh] is mentioned only regarding an intensely white spot, also in regard to all the appearances and their secondary types it is a sign of uncleanness.

It is an old tzora’as. [There is] old wound under the healthy [flesh], and this spot appears healthy above [the wound], [but] beneath it is filled with pus — so that you should not say, “Since it has produced healthy [flesh], I will declare it clean.”

From his head of a man until his feet.

To the extent that the kohein can see, excluding a kohein who has become short-sighted.

On the day healthy flesh appears on him. If healthy [flesh] has sprung up in it — but it has already been explained that healthy [flesh] is a sign of uncleanness! Rather, [this refers] to a skin-eruption which [appeared] in one of the twenty-four tips of limbs which do not become unclean because of [the sign of] healthy flesh — because the skin eruption cannot be seen all at once, since [the limbs] slope on either side. The tip of the limb [subsequently] changed and the sloping side became exposed through fat, as for example it became healthy and broadened, [so that] healthy [flesh] could be seen — the verse teaches us that it becomes unclean.

On the day. What does the verse teach us: “And on the day”? To teach us that there is a day on which you examine it, and there is a day on which you do not examine it. From here they [the Sages] said: A bridegroom is given all seven days of festivity, for him, his robe, his garments, and his house, and so too during a festival, he is given all the days of the festival.

It is tzora’as — that flesh. בָּשָׂר, [flesh], is masculine.

An inflammation. An expression of being heated, for the flesh has become inflamed with an injury which came to him because of a wound, [and] not by fire.

That has healed. [That is,] the inflammation has healed, and in its place another skin eruption has appeared.

Or a snow-white spot tinged with red. That [is], the skin eruption is not plain white, but variegated and intermingled with two colors — white and red.

Its appearance is lower [than the skin]. Not that its substance is lower, but because of its whiteness it appears low and deep, as the appearance [of anything illuminated by] the sun [seems] deeper than shadow.

It is a skin eruption — this [spot of] intense whiteness or snow-white [spot].

In its place, [that is, not literally, “beneath it,” but] in its place.

A scar of the inflammation. As its Targum: “the impression of the inflammation,” it is only an impression of the inflammation which is seen in the flesh. Any scar is an expression of wrinkling of the skin which becomes wrinkled because of inflammation, as [in the verse]: “and every face shall become shrivelled.” Retrecir in Old French.

Scar. Retrecissement in Old French.

Healthy flesh of the burnt part. Sainement [in Old French]. When the burnt part healed, it became a variegated snow-white spot or plain white. The signs of a burnt spot and the signs of an inflammation are the same; why [then] did the Torah separate them? To tell you that they cannot be combined one with the other. [If] inflammation [the size of] half a half-bean develops, and half a half-bean of burnt spot, they may not be judged as a [whole] half-bean.

On the head or in the beard. The verse comes to distinguish between a skin-eruption in a hairy part [of the body] and a skin-eruption on a fleshy [part of the body]; for the sign of [impurity] of one is a white hair, and the sign of [impurity] of the other is a golden hair.

There is a golden hair in it. [That is,] the black hair in it turned golden.

It is a nesek, such is the name of a skin eruption in a hairy part [of the body].

And there is no black hair in it. Thus, if there was a black hair in it, he is [ritually] clean and there is no need for confinement, for the black hair is a sign of purity in regard to nesokim, as it is said, “And a black hair grew in it, [the nesek is healed, he is clean].”

And behold, it did not spread, etc. Thus, if it spread or there was in it a golden hair, it is unclean.

He shall be shaved around the nesek.

but he shall not shave the nesek. He leaves two hairs next to it all around, in order that its spread should be recognizable, for if it spreads, it will pass the hairs and enter the shaven [part of the skin].

After he is pronounced clean. [I know] only if it spreads after [his] release [that he is unclean], from where [do I know that this applies] even at the end of the first week or the end of the second week? The verse says: “if it certainly spreads.”

And black hair. From where [do we know] that even green or red [is a sign of purity], since it [= the color of the hair] is not gold? The verse says: “and hair.” The expression tzohov [refers to anything] resembling the appearance of gold. Tzohov [is] like zohov, orpale in Old French.

He is clean, and the kohein shall declare him clean. Thus, an unclean [person] whom the kohein declares clean is not clean.

white spots, spots.

Dim white spots, where their whiteness is not strong, but pale.

Scurf. Like whiteness which is seen in the flesh of a red-complexioned man, who is called rouge [in Old French], between his freckles — this is called “scurf,” like a like a man who is covered with freckles, where between each freckle the flesh glows with a strong white hue.

He is [merely] bald; he is clean. He is clean of the uncleanness of nesek, for he is not judged by the signs of head and beard, which [apply] to a hairy part [of the body], but rather by the signs of a skin eruption of the flesh — (white hair), healthy [flesh], and spreading.

If on the front of his head. From the slope of his skull toward his face is called gabachas — even the temples on either side are included. From the slope of his skull toward his back is called karachas.

A white skin eruption, tinged with red — variegated. From where [do we know the rule regarding] other appearances? The verse says: “skin eruption. As the appearance of tzora’as of the skin of the flesh.” Like the appearance of the tzora’as which is mentioned in the parashoh of “the skin of the flesh” — “When a person will have, in the skin of his flesh,” and what is said there? That he becomes unclean with four [types of] appearances, and is judged with [confinement of a maximum] of two weeks. It is not like the appearance of tzora’as mentioned in [regard] to inflammations and burnt parts, where he is judged with [confinement] of one week. It is also not like the appearance of nesokin in the hairy parts [of the head], which do not cause uncleaness by four [types of] appearance: a spot of intense whiteness and its second, a snow-white spot and its second.

His skin eruption is on his head. I [know the following laws] only of nesokin; from where [do I know] to include other afflicted persons? The verse says: “He must surely declare him unclean” — to include all of them. Regarding all of them it says: “His clothes shall have a tear in them, [his hair shall grow long, etc.”]

Have a tear in them, torn.

Be grown long. Hair grown long.

And he must cover his head down to his upper lips, like a mourner.

Upper lip, the hair of the lips, grenon in Old French.

And “Unclean, unclean” shall he call out. He must announce that he is unclean [so that people] will keep away from him.

He shall dwell alone — that other unclean persons shall not dwell with him. Our Rabbis said: Why is he different from other unclean persons to dwell alone? Since by his slanderous tongue, he separated man from his wife, and a man from his fellow Jew, so he too will be separated.

Beyond the encampment. Beyond the three encampments.

In a linen garment and a woolen garment. Of linen or of wool.

Or with leather — this [refers to] leather with which no work was done.

Or in any object made of leather — this [refers to] a leather with which work was done.

Green, deep green.

Red, deep red.

A prickly tzora’as. As in the expression, “a prickly brier,” poignant in Old French. And its midrashic intepretation: Give him a curse (מְאֵרָה) that he may not benefit therefrom.

Be it in wool or in linen. Of wool or of linen — this is its plain meaning. And its midrashic interpretation: Perhaps he should bring fleeces of wool or stalks of flax and burn them with it? The verse says: “It shall be burned in fire” — it does not need anything else with it. If so, why does the verse say: “be it in wool or in linen”? To exclude [from burning] the borders in it made from another material. The word אוּמְרִיּוֹת is an expression of “edge,” like אִימְרָא, “border.”

The article having the eruption. Perhaps [washing is required] of the place of the eruption alone? The verse says: “the article having the eruption” — perhaps [then] the entire garment requires washing? The verse says: “the eruption.” How is this possible? He should wash some of the garment along with it.

After it was washed, a passive construction.

The eruption did not change its hue. It did not fade from its [original] color.

And the eruption did not spread. We understand that if it did not turn [color] and did not spread, it is unclean — all the more so if it did not turn [color] but spread. [But if] it turned [color] but did not spread, I do not know what should be done with it. [Therefore] the verse says: “He shall confine the eruption” — in any case, so the words of R. Yehudah. But the Sages say, etc., as it is in Toras Kohanim. I make mention of this here [in order] to explain th[is] verse properly.

It is a deep mark. An expression [denoting] a pit, as [in the verse] “in one of the pits,” that is to say, it is deep, an eruption whose appeared is sunken.

Be it in a worn garment or be it in a new garment. As its Targum, “in its worn state or in its new state.”

In a worn, worn, old. And [these expressions are used] for the midrashic interpretation which requires a גְזֵרָה שָׁוָה . How do we know that if [the eruption’s] spreading over [the entire garment] [is considered a sign] of cleanness for garments? קָרַחַת and גַבַּחַת is said in [regard] to a person, and קָרַחַת and גַבַּחַת is said in [regard] to a garments, just as in the former case [if] it spread throughout all of it it is clean, so here [if] it spread throughout all of it, it is clean. Therefore, the verse seized on the expression of קָרַחַת and גַבַּחַת . Regarding the matter of its Targum[ic interpretation] this is its [plain] meaning: קַרַחַת is an expression [denoting] “old” and גַבַּחַת is an expression [denoting] “new,” as though it were written “at its end or at its beginning.” Because קָּרַחַת is an expression [denoting] the back, and גַּבַּחַת is an expression [denoting] the front, as it is written: “and if on the front [of his head],” and the קָּרַחַת [refers to] anything which slopes down and descends from the skull and to the back. So it is explained in Toras Kohanim.

He shall tear it. He shall tear the place of the eruption from the garment and burn it.

It is a recurrent outbreak. Something which returns and erupts.

You shall burn it in fire — the whole garment.

The eruption disappears from them, if when they wash it at first, by order of the kohein, the eruption disappears from it entirely.

It shall be washed a second time. An expression of immersion [in a mikveh]; the Targum[ic expression] of “washing” in this section is an expression of whitening. “and it shall be whitened” — except for this [case], where it [refers] not to whitening but to immersion. Therefore its Targum is “and it shall be dipped.” So too all clothes washing — which [really refer to] immersion are translated [into Aramaic] as “and it shall be dipped.”