If anyone would like to help learn some mishnayos for the shloshim of my FIL, much appreciated. Here is a sign up link.
I was learning sotah and came across the mishna in the first perek that says:
וְכֹהֵן אוֹחֵז בִּבְגָדֶיהָ, אִם נִקְרְעוּ נִקְרָעוּ, אִם נִפְרְמוּ נִפְרָמוּ
The fact that the mishna uses both terms shows that there must be a difference between the term פרע and the term קרע.
Rashi comments: פרימה גדולה מקריעה שנקרעה לקרעים הרבה
Bartenura has another interpretation that kr'iah is a vertical tear.
Given the distinction between the terms, I was wondering why our parsha says with respect to the kohen gadol אֶת־רֹאשׁוֹ֙ לֹ֣א יִפְרָ֔ע וּבְגָדָ֖יו לֹ֥א יִפְרֹֽם׃ (21:10)? Since the idea is that the k"g is not supposed to display simanei aveilus, shouldn't the pasuk use the term קריעה and not פּריעה?
See Malbim.
At a recent qevurah I attended, the rav made a point of making sure that the aveilim "tore qeri'ah" with a vertical tear. Seems Yekkes hold like the Bartenura. (Maybe we all do, it's just the first time I noticed anyone being maqpid.)
ReplyDelete. וכן אם קרע לרוחב הבגד לא יצא מפני שאינו נראה שקרע אלא נראה שנקרע מעצמו (רדב"ז ח"ג סי' תק"ס) אלא דוקא בית הצואר:
DeleteChochmas Adam 152:2
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteInteresting, but does not fit the Bartenura. He seems to say it would be by definition qeri'ah, but the tear would look like one that happened on its own.
DeleteThe AhS YD 340:4 only has one line on it, and in parentheses at the very end:
(וקריעה דחיובא אינו לרוחב הבגד אלא לארכו.)
In the Oz veHarar edition, it is in Rashi script, like one of the hagahos you usually find at the end of a se'if AhS. But those are usually sevara, not giving iqar hadin. I no longer have an original edition to compare typefaces.