Helpful Saints Corpus Reader
Abarbanel on Torah
Abarbanel on Torah — Sefaria Community Translation
Unverified edition · NUM-19
Reading language: eng · Original language (catalog): English
Reading display
Display preferences stay on this browser when storage is available.
Resume in the Library keeps only your last public work, edition and passage on this browser.
Saved Places
Saved only on this browser. Places do not synchronize between devices. Only work, edition and passage identifiers are kept; passage text is not stored.
Remove all Saved Places from this browser? Resume reading and display preferences will stay.
NUM-19 · All reading sections
Choose an edition
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:1
And the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying, 'This is the statute of the Torah...' until '...when the entire congregation of Israel comes to the Wilderness of Zin.' And there are questions to be asked here:
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:2
The first question is, if this commandment was from the laws of the priests and the Israelites were commanded regarding it at Mount Sinai, as stated by our Sages, and according to their acceptance on the first day of Nisan when the Tabernacle was erected, receiving ten crowns on that day, and it was on that day that the red heifer was burned, why is its commandment not mentioned except in this place, after the incident of Korah and his congregation, the complainers, and the rest of the narratives and commandments mentioned earlier?
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:3
The second question is, why after mentioning this commandment, the Torah does not state, "And the children of Israel did so as the Lord commanded them through Moses," or "And Eleazar did so as Moses commanded him," using a similar language as it is customary in the Torah to say after the commandments that were fulfilled as commanded?
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:4
The third question is, by stating, "This is the statute of the Torah that the Lord commanded, saying," why does the verse specifically use this language when referring to the commandment of the red heifer? Why is it not said in the same way for other commandments? It would have been appropriate to say, "This is the matter that the Lord commanded to do." And why is it necessary to call it a statute at this point? Is it because the Satan accuses not only the red heifer but also the scapegoat, the heifer whose neck is broken, and other commandments? And yet they are not referred to as statutes. It is even more surprising that the statute is connected to the Torah. However, concerning the Passover, it is said, "This is the statute of the Passover," and not "the statute of the Torah."
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:5
The fourth question is, why does the red heifer have to be a female and not a male? If its purpose is to atone for the sin of the golden calf, it would be more appropriate for it to be a male rather than a female. And why is it specifically required to be red? In the case of the sin offering of Yom Kippur or the unintentional sins of the community, the high priest, or the goats of Yom Kippur, and other sin offerings, the Torah does not command that they have a unique red or black color. So why is it necessary for the red heifer to have this distinctive color?
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:6
The fifth question is, when it says, "And you shall give it to Eleazar the priest," Rashi explains that the commandment is addressed to his deputy. We must inquire why Aaron the high priest was not commanded regarding the red heifer, and instead his deputy was instructed. Especially considering that Moses performed the first red heifer ritual in the desert. Additionally, it is stated in the teachings of our sages that Ezra performed the second red heifer ritual, Shimon the Just performed it twice, and Yochanan the high priest performed two others. Therefore, the task of performing the red heifer ritual is not attributed to the deputies but rather to the high priests. So why, in this case, is the red heifer assigned to Eleazar the priest?
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:7
The sixth question is regarding the instruction to slaughter the red heifer outside the camp, and from there Eleazar shall sprinkle its blood seven times towards the front of the Tabernacle. Why was its slaughter not performed in the sanctuary, and why was its body burned outside the camp, similar to the procedure with the bull of the Yom Kippur sin offering performed by the high priest?
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:8
The seventh question is, why wasn't it commanded to offer the fat of the sin offering on the altar, as it is stated regarding the Yom Kippur sin offering, "And the fat of the sin offering he shall burn on the altar"? And what is the reason for burning its skin, flesh, blood, and horns, since although it was commanded to do so with the bull of the Yom Kippur sin offering, the matter itself is difficult and requires an explanation or hint.
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:9
The eighth question is, why was it commanded to place cedarwood, hyssop, and scarlet thread into the fire of the red heifer, but such a command was not given for the Yom Kippur sin offering or other offerings, except for the offering of the metzora (one afflicted with tzara'at)? The Torah refers to the ashes of the red heifer as the "water of impurity" for purification. So why is its procedure different from that of other sin offerings?
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:10
The ninth question is, why in the case of the mitzvah of the red heifer and its service, there were three individuals involved in the purification process? The first is the high priest, as it is stated, "And the priest shall wash his garments," implying that he becomes impure until evening. The second is the one who burns the red heifer. And the third is the one who gathers the ashes of the red heifer. However, in the case of the bull and the goat sin offerings of Yom Kippur, only the one who burns them is required to become impure, as it is stated, "And he who burns them shall wash his garments and bathe his body in water." Furthermore, it is not stated regarding them that they become impure until evening.
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:11
The tenth question is, why are the water mixed with the ashes of the red heifer called "the water of impurity" (mei niddah)? It would have been more appropriate to call them "the water of the red heifer" (mei parah) or "the water of the ashes of the red heifer" (mei efer haparah) or "the water of purification" (mei taharah), not "the water of impurity." Rashi explains that "mei niddah" means water of sprinkling, similar to "and he shall sprinkle it with his finger," referring to the act of sprinkling. It is a language of purification, as is apparent. However, this interpretation is not correct because why should they be called "the water" based on the act of sprinkling and not based on their essence, which is the ashes of the red heifer or purification?
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:12
The eleventh question is, why did the blessed One establish the purification of the impure through the ashes of the red heifer, which involves the process mentioned here? What is the connection between those ashes and that purification? There is no doubt that this was the secret of the red heifer, and it was the accusation of the adversary (Satan) against it. Therefore, it is called a "chok" (statute) and a decree of the King. However, it is still appropriate to make an effort to provide an explanation or hint that aligns with reason.
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:13
The twelfth question is, why did the ashes of the red heifer purify the impure and, at the same time, render the pure impure? As it is stated, "Whoever touches the water of impurity shall be unclean until evening," and "Whoever touches the water of impurity shall wash his clothes." These actions are contradictory. Yet, within this contradiction lies the profound meaning of this commandment, and it is precisely this aspect that incited much debate and criticism.
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:14
I will now explain these verses in a more profound manner, addressing all these questions. However, I will not delve into the ways of the Ralbag (Rabbi Levi ben Gershom), who provided an allegorical interpretation for this commandment, hinting at the existence of distorted forms.
Abarbanel on Torah, Numbers 19:1:15
And the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying, "This is the statute of the Torah that the Israelites are commanded to bring: a red heifer without blemish, in which there is no defect and on which a yoke has never been placed." According to the tradition passed down from our sages, Moses our teacher, may he rest in peace, performed the first red heifer ritual when he served in the Tabernacle as the High Priest. On the first day of the month of Nisan, when the Tabernacle was erected, the red heifer was prepared to purify anyone who had contracted impurity from contact with a corpse, so that they would not defile the sanctuary. Due to the establishment of the Tabernacle and the joy of the people in it, it was necessary to purify every impure person in a way that they would not enter and desecrate the sanctuary and its holy items. From that ash, they would purify themselves throughout the days of the desert. However, towards the end of the forty years when they were about to enter the land, the Lord foresaw that in the battles with the nations, many would fall as casualties of war, and many of the children of Israel would come into contact with the dead. This could happen both in the cities they would conquer and on the open field, whether through the slain by the sword, contact with a corpse, human bone, or a grave. They would become impure, and the ashes of the red heifer that Moses had prepared would not be sufficient for them. Therefore, at this time, the Lord commanded Moses and Aaron regarding the procedure for the red heifer, even though the incident with the burning of the calf by Korah and his assembly from among the dead occurred due to a plague and the complaints of many people in the land. They also became impure, and they too would reduce the supply of the ashes of the red heifer that Moses had made. Concerning all these matters, the commandment regarding the red heifer came in this specific place. That is why it is not mentioned here in the text that the Israelites or Eleazar carried out the commandment as Moses instructed, because the commandment was mentioned here in this place, but the act was not yet performed. For the matter was a rare occurrence, and the commandment was to be performed only when the need arose. Since Moses our teacher had already performed this commandment several years ago, it was necessary for God to say to Moses and Aaron, "This is the statute of the Torah," meaning that just as you performed the Red Heifer, so shall you continue to do it every time you need it. What you have done will remain as an established statute and custom for the nation to follow. The mention of "This is the statute of the Torah" is also a very significant hint. It signifies that the matter of the Red Heifer is a hint and instruction regarding the Divine Torah. As will be explained later, it means that the phrase "This is the statute of the Torah" refers to the commandment regarding the Red Heifer, which serves as a hint to the divine law imposed upon you. The answers to the first three questions, the first, second, and third, have already been clarified. And behold, it says, "Speak to the children of Israel, and have them take for you a red heifer," to signify that the Red Heifer will serve as a symbol for the community. Since it was offered as a communal sacrifice for the entire congregation, God commanded that the Red Heifer be a female, symbolically alluding to the nation of Israel. Israel is called a "heifer" to indicate their rebellious nature. Israel will overcome and conquer their enemies, and they will possess the entire land. No other nation will conquer it. It is called "red" in reference to the beloved one, pure and adorned, with redness surpassing rubies. It has been clarified that these conditions apply to the Red Heifer, with its specific requirements serving as a symbol for the congregation of Israel. Since God foresaw that Aaron would pass away before another Red Heifer could be prepared, and his son Eleazar would serve as the High Priest in his place, He said, "You shall give it to Eleazar the priest to perform the ritual." This means that Eleazar would be the one to carry out the procedure. As I have explained, this commandment was not given at that moment to instruct them to perform the Red Heifer ceremony, but rather to inform them that they would perform it when the need arises. And God wanted to make it known that when they eventually perform it, Eleazar would already be in his role as the High Priest. According to the Ralbag (Rabbi Levi ben Gershon), he wrote that the phrase "You shall give it to Eleazar to perform the ritual" implies that the burning of the Red Heifer should be done while the priest is wearing white garments, not golden ones. Therefore, God specifically mentioned Eleazar, indicating that he would carry out this commandment instead of Aaron, whose service involved wearing golden garments. However, this interpretation is incorrect, and it does not address questions four and five. Now, the sin offering of the high priest on Yom Kippur, since its purpose was for him not to enter the sanctuary, its slaughtering, sprinkling of its blood, and offering of its fat were performed on the altar of the Lord. However, the Red Heifer, its purpose was to symbolically address the nation while being in a state of impurity, as it is not appropriate for it to enter the sanctuary. Therefore, it was commanded that its slaughtering would take place outside the camp, and from there its blood would be sprinkled, as its blood should not enter the sanctuary like the blood of the sin offering. And it shall be in front of the Tent of Meeting, indicating that it should be placed opposite the Ark cover, and in front of the Ark cover, for its service was similar to the service of the sin offering. The only difference was that it was performed outside the camp, while the service of the sin offering was done in the sanctuary. The purpose of the Red Heifer was to bring closer those who were distant from the Divine Presence in the camp. Therefore, its blood was not brought to the altar, like the blood of the sin offering, because it could not enter there. This resolves questions six and seven. Furthermore, it was commanded that the Red Heifer should be burned, just as every burnt offering is burned, and just like the sin offering of Yom Kippur. And its burning included its skin, flesh, blood, and dung, because the Red Heifer symbolized the community. It contained different levels of people, some honorable and others less esteemed, analogous to the organs in the body of the heifer. All of them were burned together, indicating that it was fitting for punishment and judgment that both the minor and major offenders should be burned, the leader and the commoner, the important and the less significant. And He commanded to throw into the burning of the Red Heifer cedarwood, hyssop, and crimson thread, to symbolize that the Red Heifer represented the entire community, both the small and the great. Therefore, the mention of cedarwood, which is the tallest among the trees, and hyssop, which is the lowest among them, serves as a reminder. As it is written, "From the cedarwood that is in Lebanon to the hyssop that comes out of the wall," and likewise, the crimson thread is very low. And because the ashes of the Red Heifer alone had the power to purify those who became impure through contact with a corpse, as I have already explained in detail, it happened on the eighth day that the most severe form of impurity, which is the impurity of a human corpse, was purified. This is because its composition is more straightforward and equal than the compositions of all other living creatures. When it decomposes, it decomposes more rapidly than other animals. Therefore, anyone who touches a human corpse, and as a result, experiences its decomposition, will himself undergo decomposition from that contact. If he does not perceive it and there is no change in his odor or appearance, similar to what happens to a person afflicted with tzara'at when he is in a state of impurity resembling death. Therefore, the Torah was very concerned that one who is impure due to contact with a human corpse of this kind should not enter the sanctuary and desecrate it. As a symbolic gesture, the ashes of the Red Heifer were meant to remove and nullify that impurity and all the potential negative consequences associated with it. Therefore, God commanded that they should throw into the burning of the Red Heifer the cedarwood, which does not decompose easily, at any time, and the hyssop, which has a pleasant fragrance. And two scarlet threads were included to indicate that the impurity resulting from menstrual discharge causes a greater degree of decomposition and a foul odor, whereas the greenish appearance is due to the decomposition of its blood. As I explained earlier, this is also the case with the offering of the leper in its designated place. However, in the case of the Red Heifer, since there was no suspicion of such a matter, there was no need to include these elements, and therefore question six is resolved. And he commanded that all those involved with the Red Heifer should become impure. For behold, Eleazar the priest or another priest who performs the burning of the Red Heifer becomes impure by touching its blood and sprinkling it, and he remains impure until evening. He would then require immersion and washing of his garments. Similarly, the one who burns the Red Heifer will also become impure because he touches it during its burning. And after the burning, a pure individual shall gather the ashes of the Red Heifer, and he too will become impure until evening due to his contact with the ashes. Indeed, regarding the Red Heifer, neither the Day of Atonement's Red Heifer nor the communal Red Heifer required purification except for the one who burned it, because after the confession, the sins of the Israelites were transferred onto it. However, prior to the burning, the Red Heifer did not impart impurity, and after the burning, the Red Heifer did not cause impurity either. Therefore, only the one who burned it became impure, not others. However, the Red Heifer itself, symbolizing the community, was considered impure and separated. Consequently, anyone who touched it became impure, as it is stated that a pure individual shall gather its ashes and place them outside the camp. The sages of blessed memory have taught that the portion of those ashes was divided into three parts. One part was placed on the Mount of Anointing, one part was divided among all the watchtowers, and one part was given to the camp. The portion for the watchtowers was located outside the sanctuary, so that the inhabitants of the cities and all those in need of purification could take from it. The portion on the Mount of Anointing was used for other Red Heifers. And the portion in the camp was assigned to the designated watchtower, as decreed by the Scripture, and it served as a safeguard for the community of the children of Israel. And behold, those ashes are placed outside the sanctuary and the camp, so that impure individuals may come there to purify themselves on the third and seventh days. Then they return to complete their atonement in the sanctuary. However, if someone who is impure due to contact with a corpse enters the Tabernacle, the ashes do not purify him. He remains impure, and his impurity is even intensified by entering the holy place. He is liable to receive the punishment of karet (spiritual excision). Even if he immerses in the mikveh (ritual bath) and washes his garments, it does not remove his impurity. It is said that the Red Heifer atones for those who are impure due to contact with a corpse. It is called a "niddah" (a woman in the state of menstrual impurity) because it was distanced and removed from the camp, similar to the way a woman in her menstrual state is separated. The water that was sprinkled on the ashes is called "mayim niddah" (waters of impurity), indicating that it is water placed on the ashes of impurity. However, the specific details of this ritual are not fully understood. What is clear is that the Red Heifer is a sin offering for the entire community. Similarly, the Red Heifer that was used in the time of King Solomon was brought to atone for the impurity of the Temple and its sanctified objects. Through this ritual, the nine unresolved questions were answered, and the matter was concluded. After completing the instructions regarding the Red Heifer, the Scripture clarifies who needs to purify themselves with the water of the Red Heifer. It says that anyone who touches a dead body becomes impure, meaning that the impurity is only contracted through direct contact with a human corpse, not through contact with another type of impurity or a creeping creature that has died. The Scripture further states that the impure individual shall purify themselves on the third day and on the seventh day. On the third day, the primary impurity already diminishes from them, and only a residual impurity remains until the seventh day. This is similar to the afflictions of a person with sharp wounds, where the swiftest period of healing is the third day, followed by the fourth day. Similarly, the mourning period for a deceased person has a boundary, and the maximum period of mourning, including weeping, is until the third day. From that point until the seventh day, the individual resumes their regular activities, which may be carried out by others if the mourner is unable to perform them due to modesty. If one does not purify themselves with the water of the Red Heifer on the third day, then on the seventh day they will not be purified. The Scripture imposes a punishment on those who transgress this requirement, stating: "Anyone who touches a dead body, that is, any human soul who dies and does not purify themselves with the water of the Red Heifer, and then enters the sanctuary, defiles the tabernacle of the Lord; that person shall be cut off." This means that once a person becomes impure through contact with a corpse and does not undergo purification with the water of the Red Heifer, their impurity remains and they are subject to punishment. In such a case, merely washing their body or laundering their garments will not be effective for them. They will remain impure despite the physical cleansing. And since a person may argue, "I did not touch the body of the deceased," because even though I was in close proximity to the tent where the deceased was, I did not come into contact with their flesh, the Scripture addresses these claims by stating: "This is the law when a man dies in a tent: all who come into the tent and all that is in the tent shall be unclean." This means that anything inside the tent, whether it is garments, vessels, food, or drink, everything shall become unclean. Any earthenware vessel that has no covering fastened to it with a cord is susceptible to impurity. The word "tzamid" comes from the Hebrew word "yitzamed," which means "to attach." This implies that Israel is not able to prevent impurity from entering it. Similarly, anyone who touches the surface of the field where the body of a person who was killed by a sword, spear, or bow lies shall become unclean. This applies specifically to the malefactor's sword, as the Scripture speaks in the present tense. It also applies to a dead body found in the field by itself, thrown there, or buried there, even if only bones are found in a grave. And this is the manner of purifying oneself: The burial place of the deceased, where everyone needs purification through the water of the ashes of the Red Heifer. All this served as a warning to the Israelites during the days of future wars when they were about to conquer the land, that anyone who touches these things shall purify themselves. This means that every person who is impure shall become impure for seven days and then purify themselves. Now, the process of purification will be explained. When it says, "They shall take for the unclean person," it means that the priests shall take it for the purpose of purification for the one who comes to purify themselves from the ashes of the burnt Red Heifer, which is the sin offering. Water of life shall be added to a vessel, meaning flowing water, and it shall be in one vessel. The priest who is purifying or another pure person shall take hyssop, dip it in those waters, and sprinkle it on the tent, all the vessels, and the souls that were in the tent where the deceased was, as well as on the one who touches a corpse in the field, whether it is a corpse by itself or bones found in a field or in a grave. For through this sprinkling, the impure shall become completely pure on the seventh day. They shall wash their garments and bathe in water, and they shall be pure in the evening. And behold, it was necessary to reiterate the statement, "And the man who becomes impure and does not purify himself shall be cut off," even though it was already mentioned above, because there it was stated regarding one who enters the tent of the deceased, and here it is stated regarding one who touches the corpse in the field or a corpse, or human bones in a grave in an open field. And it was said, "And the one who touches the water of impurity shall be impure until evening." This shows that there is no additional requirement for him, as it was already stated earlier regarding the one who sprinkles the water of impurity on his garments, and our sages said that the one who sprinkles is pure. This comes to teach us that one who carries the ashes of the Red Heifer, like the hide of the goat, imparts a severe impurity to garments that come into contact with it, unlike mere physical contact. And based on a straightforward understanding, it seems that one who sprinkles the water of impurity does not become impure, because he does not touch the ashes of the Red Heifer or the water. Rather, the hyssop is immersed in them, and the sprinkler himself does not make direct contact with anything. Therefore, it does not say regarding him that he shall become impure, but only that he shall wash his garments. However, the one who touches the water of impurity shall become impure until evening, because he makes contact with them and with the ashes that are mixed with the water, and he becomes impure like all those involved in the process of the Red Heifer. This is to indicate the severity of impurity caused by contact with a corpse. It is stated, "And everything that touches it shall become impure; whoever touches the soul of the impure shall be impure." This serves as the source of impurity, even when the soul touches an impure corpse. This is the essence of the impurity, and it is evident from this that touching a corpse is the source of all forms of impurity. From what I have explained in the portion, we can derive the answer to the question: Why did God associate the purification of the impure with the ashes of the red heifer? It is because the red heifer was the offering of the community, and it was performed outside the camp. Due to its impurity, it was not fitting for it to enter the camp of Israel. The one who became purified through these ashes would thereby acknowledge his sin and impurity, as if to say, "This is how I should be, distanced from my impurity." And thus, he became purified through it. However, these ashes could also render the pure impure, as anything that came into contact with them would become impure. Since the red heifer itself was impure, as hinted in the verse, the one who touched it would become impure. Therefore, the verse concludes, "And everything that touches it shall become impure." In the end, these verses address and resolve the two questions raised. Rashi borrowed from the teachings of Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan to interpret this portion concerning the incident of the Golden Calf. "And they shall take for you" - just as they willingly contributed their golden earrings for the making of the calf, so shall they bring this [red heifer] for atonement from their own possessions. The red heifer is likened to a maidservant's son who soiled the king's palace, and they said, "Let his mother come and clean her son's filth." Similarly, let the red heifer come and atone for the sin of the calf. It is called "red" because the sin is referred to as crimson wool. It is called "unblemished" because the Israelites were originally unblemished and later became blemished. Let this [red heifer] come and atone for them so that they may return to their state of unblemishedness. "No yoke has come upon it" - meaning they removed the yoke of heavenly sovereignty from themselves. "To Eleazar the priest" - just as they assembled around Aaron, who was the priest responsible for making the calf, and since Aaron made the calf, he was not commanded to perform this service, for a prosecutor cannot become a defender. "And he shall burn the heifer before him" - just as Moses burned the calf. Cedar wood, hyssop, and crimson wool - corresponding to the three types of people who stumbled with the calf, which were three thousand men. The cedar wood is the tallest among all trees, while the hyssop is the lowest and smallest among them, symbolizing that one who became arrogant and sinned should humble himself like the hyssop and the crimson wool, and he will be atoned for. "For a memorial" - like a watchman who is vigilant at all times, as the calf's punishment will be remembered for all generations, as it is stated, "And in the day of My visitation, I will visit upon them." There is no appointed time that does not include the remembrance of the incident of the calf. "Just as the calf renders impure all those who deal with it, so too, the red heifer renders impure all those who deal with it. And just as they were purified with the ashes of the calf, as it is stated, 'He shall sprinkle it on the surface of the water,' similarly, they shall take for impurity the ashes of the burnt sin offering, and so on. This is indeed a valid observation and a hint that corresponds to the matter. However, in my opinion, the red heifer was a sacrifice for the entire congregation of the children of Israel, to purify them from the impurity of death, so that they would not desecrate the sanctuary and its holy objects." Indeed, the Lord said to Moses and Aaron when He wanted to teach them the manner of this commandment, "This is the statute of the Torah." And afterwards, He spoke about the matter of the red heifer to inform them that it is similar to what He commands and should be done in accordance with the Divine Torah. It does not mean that the Torah is likened to the red heifer itself in a literal sense, but rather, the example of what they should do with the red heifer serves as a model for the statute that should be followed in the Divine Torah. Therefore, "This is the statute of the Torah" comes before the words "Speak to the children of Israel and have them take to you." With this, there is no need to force the verse to say, "Speak to the children of Israel, this is the statute of the Torah," as the Ramban explains. The explanation is that just as the Torah of the Lord is perfect without any blemish, so He commanded that the red heifer should be perfect, without any blemish. And just as a person enjoys the fruits of his Torah in this world and in the World to Come, for its produce is better than gold and pearls, so this offering served as an atonement, which was the good produce. And just as one who takes upon himself the yoke of Torah is relieved of the yoke of worldly matters, for no burden is placed upon the Torah. With this, there is no need to force the verse to say, "Speak to the children of Israel, this is the statute of the Torah," as the Ramban explains. The explanation is that just as the Torah of the Lord is perfect without any blemish, so He commanded that the red heifer should be perfect, without any blemish. And just as a person enjoys the fruits of his Torah in this world and in the World to Come, for its produce is better than gold and pearls, so this offering served as an atonement, which was the good produce. And just as one who takes upon himself the yoke of Torah is relieved of the yoke of worldly matters, for no burden is placed upon the Torah. Similarly, He commanded concerning the red heifer that no burden should be placed upon it. And just as the Torah requires in its study the assistance of the Divine Help, and it is found in its completeness in the intellect of the priest, as it is said, "For the lips of the priest shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the law at his mouth," so it is said regarding the red heifer, "And you shall give it to Eleazar the priest." And just as the true contemplation in the Torah occurs when a person is alone and isolated, so it was commanded regarding the red heifer that it should be taken outside the camp. And just as one needs to delve into the will of the Lord in the Torah, not only grasping and understanding its external aspects but also its internal and hidden aspects, so it was commanded regarding the red heifer that it should be slaughtered and its innermost blood extracted. And just as in the study of the Torah, it is proper for a person not to teach something contrary to the Halacha and not to distort the face of the Torah, but rather according to the true tradition received. So it was commanded regarding the red heifer that its blood should be sprinkled in the presence of the Tent of Meeting, before the Ark of the Testimony, where the Torah resided. And just as the roots of the Torah and Kabbalah are the sources of illumination, and just as in the Torah, the "sons of flame" are those who elevate themselves to a higher level of understanding and grasp its mysteries before the teacher, for intellect is compared to flame, and the distinguished intellects are referred to as standing flames above it. So it was commanded regarding the red heifer that the priest should burn it in his sight. And just as it is necessary in the burning and study of the Torah to distinguish well between the external and internal letters and words within it, so it was commanded regarding the red heifer that its blood and flesh should be burned in a specific manner, signifying the more esteemed part and the lesser part. Additionally, it was commanded to burn with it a cedar wood, which is taller than all other trees, and hyssop, which is lower and humbler. And similarly, two scarlet worms, which have a value comparable to hyssop, which is lighter. Just as the teacher of Torah and the student who learns before him, and those who serve before them, need to possess good character traits and be free from reprehensible things, so it was commanded regarding the red heifer that the priest who performs the ritual and the one who burns it should do so, as it is stated: "And the one who gathers the ashes of the heifer shall wash his clothes, and he shall bathe his body in water, and afterward he may come into the holy camp." This symbolizes the rectification of character traits, and they shall wash their flesh with water before entering the holy camp. And just as the Torah purifies the impure and it is truly living water, so it was commanded regarding the red heifer that living water should be mixed with its ashes, and the impure ones would be purified. And just as the divine Torah requires the sages to be cautious in their words so as not to err, for an inadvertent error in learning leads to intentional transgression, so it was commanded regarding the red heifer that one who touches it or its ashes becomes impure and requires immersion and washing of garments. Now, it is clear that the matter of the red heifer itself is the statute of the Torah. Therefore, when God wishes to command regarding this mitzvah, He says, "This is the statute of the Torah," meaning, "Do not consider the mitzvah of the red heifer and its details as insignificant in your eyes. Know that it is a model of the Torah and the obligatory conduct in its study."
Compare this section in another edition
Read the editions separately. Matching section labels do not establish word or phrase alignment.
Only publicly readable editions are offered. An original-language parallel requires an admitted source edition; a retained private witness is not displayed here.
About this edition
Recorded completeness: PARTIAL: all supplied nonempty community English leaves only; many Hebrew sections have no English counterpart.. Available reading sections are listed below.
Limited body coverage in this view · eng
39 chapter/reading unit(s) · 134 nonempty passage record(s).
Fewer reading units or passage records than another edition of this work shown here. Editions may divide text differently.
Supported chapters & passages
- GEN-intro · 2 passage record(s)
- GEN-1 · 3 passage record(s)
- GEN-9 · 1 passage record(s)
- GEN-12 · 5 passage record(s)
- GEN-21 · 20 passage record(s)
- GEN-25 · 1 passage record(s)
- GEN-26 · 1 passage record(s)
- GEN-31 · 2 passage record(s)
- GEN-33 · 1 passage record(s)
- GEN-41 · 3 passage record(s)
- EXO-18 · 1 passage record(s)
- EXO-20 · 1 passage record(s)
- EXO-27 · 1 passage record(s)
- EXO-30 · 1 passage record(s)
- EXO-34 · 17 passage record(s)
- LEV-9 · 2 passage record(s)
- LEV-10 · 1 passage record(s)
- LEV-11 · 3 passage record(s)
- LEV-12 · 1 passage record(s)
- LEV-21 · 2 passage record(s)
- LEV-26 · 2 passage record(s)
- NUM-1 · 3 passage record(s)
- NUM-6 · 1 passage record(s)
- NUM-11 · 20 passage record(s)
- NUM-12 · 1 passage record(s)
- NUM-13 · 1 passage record(s)
- NUM-15 · 1 passage record(s)
- NUM-17 · 1 passage record(s)
- NUM-19 · 15 passage record(s)
- NUM-21 · 1 passage record(s)
- NUM-29 · 1 passage record(s)
- NUM-35 · 1 passage record(s)
- DEU-1 · 2 passage record(s)
- DEU-6 · 9 passage record(s)
- DEU-7 · 2 passage record(s)
- DEU-12 · 1 passage record(s)
- DEU-17 · 1 passage record(s)
- DEU-26 · 1 passage record(s)
- DEU-30 · 1 passage record(s)
Body coverage is separate from textual verification. Counts do not establish complete chapters or textual completeness.
Evidence Intelligence
Know what kind of evidence you are looking at.
Helpful Saints keeps direct biblical text, language evidence, ancient witnesses, historical context, research models, and open questions visibly distinct.Direct Biblical Text
The explicit wording and literary context of canonical Scripture.
Original-Language Evidence
Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, morphology, lemmas, semantic range, and textual comparison.
Ancient Witness
Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls, ancient Jewish literature, and early Christian writings—clearly classified.
Historical Context
Geography, material culture, chronology ranges, institutions, customs, and reception history.
Research Model
A configured chronology, theological synthesis, typological pattern, or proposed relationship.
Open Question
Evidence is incomplete, debated, or insufficient for a settled conclusion.