“Rabbi Simlai said, ‘just as the formation of man was after all other wildlife in the creation story, so were his laws explained after the laws regarding wildlife” (Rashi on Vayikra 12:2). Vayikra Rabbah (14:1, Rashi’s source) quotes a verse from last week’s Parasha (11:46), “this is the (corpus of) law regarding [the animal kingdom]” and from this week’s (12:2), “when a woman conceives and gives birth” to prove the point. Although this does not automatically mean that the laws of ritual impurity regarding the animal kingdom and of man are one unit, with those of the animal kingdom taught first in that same unit, several Rishonim (e.g. Ran and Rabbeinu Krescas on Gittin 60a-b) say that they are all part of one “section,” the one the Talmud calls “Parashas T’mayim,” one of the eight sections Rabbi Levi says were taught on the day the Mishkan was set up. Those who understand “Parashas T’mayim” to be referring to a different section need not consider all of this to be one unit, but we would still need to understand why these laws, which were needed as soon as the Mishkan was up and operating, were not taught then.

Last week (https://rabbidmk.wordpress.com/2016/03/31/parashas-shemini-5776/) I contrasted the Sifre Zuta’s list (Bamidbar 7:11) of 15 times that G-d communicated with Moshe on the first day of the Mishkan with Rabbi Levi’s list of the eight sections taught that day, and suggested (based on the context of the Talmud) that Rabbi Levi was only referring to those sections that were written down then too (as opposed to being written down 38+ years later, when the completed text of the Torah was given to the nation). As far as why only eight sections were written down if more were taught then (as many as nine more, since only six of Rabbi Levi’s eight are included in the Sifre Zuta’s list), I also suggested that whenever Moshe was told to “speak” to the nation to teach them what he was about to be taught, it infers to only speak to them, i.e. teach it to them orally, but not to give it to them in writing. Which brings the question back to what the Ran (et al) considers to be “Parashas T’mayim,” as for some of these laws Moshe is told to “speak” to the nation (Vayikra 12:2, 15:2), as opposed to writing them down. How can these laws be included in “Parashas T’mayim” if Moshe being told to “speak to the nation” precludes them from being writing down (then), thereby disqualifying them from being one of Rabbi Levi’s eight sections?

Although I didn’t include it as one of the possibilities last week (because I haven’t seen it suggested by anyone), it’s possible that “Parashas T’mayim” only refers to the laws of “tzora’as,” which are not introduced by instructions that Moshe “speak” to the nation. We would still need to figure out why other laws of “tumah” (ritual impurity) were either not taught that day or not to be written down (yet), but the sheer quantity and complexity of the laws of “tzora’as” could have made it necessary to put them in writing right away. Nevertheless, those with the same opinion as the Ran (see the commentary based on a manuscript that was attributed to the Ritva) includes not only the “tumah” of animals (11:29-43) in “Parashas T’mayim,” but also the “tumah” resulting from childbirth (12:2-8) and the “tumah” that accompanies bodily emissions (15:2-33), even though Moshe was told to teach these orally, which implies not (yet) writing them down.

Although the other opinions about what “Parashas T’mayim” refers to could easily say that these laws were all taught on the “Eighth Day,” the first day of the fully-functioning Mishkan, but were not written down then (so didn’t qualify to be considered “Parashas T’mayim”), the Sifre Zuta’s list includes all communications between G-d and Moshe from that day, not just those that were written down. Since the laws of “tumah” needed to be known then, why weren’t they communicated to Moshe that day as well?

The section about the “tumah” created by animal carcasses (11:1-43) begins with G-d telling Moshe and Aharon to “say to them” (11:1), followed by the instructions “speak to the Children of Israel” (11:2) to tell them about the laws that follow. Although the first set of laws is about which animals are kosher, “tumah” plays a role here too (see 11:4-8, especially 11:8 regarding not even touching the carcasses of non-kosher animals, and 11:24-28); even the Ran (et al), who quotes 11:29 as being the start of “Parashas T’mayim,” likely only did so because the opening words of that paragraph, “and this is for you what is tamay,” make it clear that it is about “tumah,” even though 11:1 is really where “Parashas T’mayim” starts. After all, why would the “tumah” mentioned before 11:29 be excluded? This is especially true since there are no other opening words (“and G-d spoke to Moshe”) after 11:1 until 12:1, so the entire chapter has to be part of the same communication. It would therefore seem that what the Ran (et al) says is “Parashas T’mayim” is everything between 11:1 and 16:1 (where another of Rabbi Levi’s eight sections begins), as it is all part of one larger unit of “tumah.” Whatever reason the Sifre Zuta had for not including this communication in the list of “Eighth Day communications” would therefore apply to this entire unit.

Toras Kohanim (quoted by Rashi on 11:1) addressing the seeming redundancy of “say to them” (11:1) followed by “speak to the Children of Israel” (11:2), explains that Moshe and Aharon should “say it to Elazar and Isamar” before it was “told to the Children of Israel.” This sequence (what G-d taught Moshe being taught to Aharon, then to Aharon’s sons, and then to the nation) was how the Torah was always taught (see Eiruvin 54b); there are several reasons given why Aharon’s sons are mentioned explicitly here. [Rashi (11:2), implying that things were different here, says that they were put in the same category as Aharon because they were all equally silent (read: accepting of G-d’s judgment) regarding the deaths of Nadav and Avihu. Vayikra Rabbah (13:1) says that they merited being included here because they remained quiet when Moshe scolded them for burning the offering instead of eating it (10:16-17) even though they knew they were right.] Ramban (see also Ibn Ezra) says that the laws taught here had to be known by the Kohanim, so it was appropriate to teach it to them first. This is especially true regarding “tzora’as,” where the Kohanim had to know all the intricate details in order to determine the status of what was shown to them. I would therefore suggest that this unit was first taught to Aharon and his sons during the seven days of training that led up to the “Eighth Day.” [Although Rashi says these “sons” were Elazar and Isamar, meaning it must have been taught after those seven days (or else Nadav an Avihu would have also been included), Midrash Lekach Tov and Targum Yonasan just say “Aharon’s sons,” which could be referring to all four of them.] The Kohanim were not allowed to leave the Mishkan compound that whole week (8:33), and had to know all of the laws included in what the Ran calls “Parashas T’mayim” right away, so it makes sense that, along with the details of the offerings, that week was spent learning the laws of “tumah.”

If this unit was taught during the seven days of training, they were obviously communicated to Moshe before the “Eighth Day,” so couldn’t be included in the Sifre Zuta’s list of “Eighth Day communications.” Not only that, but if it was taught to Moshe who taught it to Aharon and his sons orally during those seven days, it is possible that, according to the Ran (et al), Moshe was told to “speak to the Children of Israel” about the “tumah” created by childbirth and bodily emissions during those seven days as well. Instead of the implication being “don’t write it down until the rest of the Torah is written down,” the message to Moshe would be “speak to them now too,” i.e. even before the Mishkan is fully operational (perhaps so that any emissions could be kept track of now). If Moshe was only being told “don’t write it down just yet,” i.e. this week, he was not precluded from writing it down after the Mishkan was operating and the details of the laws of “tumah” had to be known (and reviewed) by the nation. And if Moshe wrote it down for them then, it qualified as being one of the eight Torah sections written on the “Eighth Day.”