That the high priest not become impure with any impurity: That the high priest not become impure — even with a dead body from among his relatives, and all the more so with all the other dead bodies in the world — with a type from the types of impurity, whether through touching or whether through carrying, as it is stated (Leviticus 21:11), “for his mother or for his father, he shall not become impure.” [This is] meaning to say, even for these which are his relatives. And even though it forbade him from becoming impure for all souls at the beginning of the verse, that is impurity of coming into the tent of a dead body, as we explained there (Sefer HaChinukh 270). As behold, there it is written, “he shall not come,” which implies coming into a tent. Whereas here all of the other types of impurity are forbidden more generally. And do not think that that which it stated, “for his father and for his mother, etc.,” is an explanation of the beginning of the verse that stated, “And for all dead souls, etc.” — as the matter is not like this. But [rather,] they are two [distinct] negative commandments, “he shall not come,” and “he shall not become impure.” And the language of Sifra, Emor, Section 2:4 is “He is liable for ‘he shall not come,’ and he is liable for ‘he shall not become impure.’” And they, may their memory be blessed likewise said, that a common priest is liable for “he shall not come,” and “he shall not become impure” — even though it is not written about him — stemming from the law of an inferential comparison; as both of them were forbidden from becoming impure with a soul, and as it appears in the Gemara. However we should not count “he shall not come” and “he shall not become impure” for a common priest as two negative commandments, such as we counted them for a high priest. [This is] as they are written explicitly with a high priest; while with a common priest, one is learned from an inferential comparison. And the elder has already instructed — that is Rambam, may his memory be blessed — that we should only count those that are explicit in Scriputre in the tally of the six hundred and thirteen commandments, but not those that are learned through the hermeneutic principles through which the Torah is expounded.
That which we wrote about the commandment preceding this is from the roots of the commandment. And it is the same law and it is the same reason; as the intention of both of them — of “he shall not come” and of “he shall not become impure” — is one matter.
And this prohibition is practiced at the time of the [Temple], as then was there a high priest there. And this prohibition is also practiced in any place that the [high] priest is there. And if he transgressed and became impure with a type of the types of impurity — and even for his relatives — he is liable for lashes.
שֶׁלֹּא יִטַּמֵּא כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל בְּשׁוּם טֻמְאָה בְּמֵת – שֶׁלֹּא יִטַּמֵּא כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל אֲפִלּוּ בְּמֵת מִקְּרוֹבָיו, וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן בְּכָל שְׁאָר הַמֵּתִים שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם, בְּמִין מִמִּינֵי הַטֻּמְאָה בֵּין בִּנְגִיעָה בֵּין בְּמַשָּׂא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כא יא) לְאָבִיו וּלְאִמּוֹ לֹא יִטַּמָּא, כְּלוֹמַר, אֲפִלּוּ לְאֵלּוּ שֶׁהֵם קְרוֹבָיו, וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁבְּרֹאשׁ הַפָּסוּק אָסַר עָלָיו מֵהִטַּמֵּא עַל כָּל הַנְּפָשׁוֹת, זֶהוּ טֻמְאַת בִּיאָה לְאֹהֶל הַמֵּת, כְּמוֹ שֶׁפֵּרַשְׁנוּ שָׁם (מצוה רע) שֶׁהֲרֵי כָּתוּב שָׁם לֹא יָבֹא דְּמַשְׁמַע בִּיאָה בְּאֹהֶל, וְכָאן יֶאֱסֹר עָלָיו כָּל שְׁאָר מִינֵי הַטֻּמְאָה בִּכְלָל. וְאַל תַּחְשֹׁב שֶׁזֶּה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְאָבִיו וּלְאִמּוֹ וְגוֹ'. הוּא פֵּרוּשׁ לְרֹאשׁ הַמִּקְרָא שֶׁאָמַר וְעַל כָּל נַפְשֹׁת וְגוֹ'. שֶׁאֵין הַדָּבָר כֵּן, אֲבָל הֵם שְׁנֵי לָאוִין לֹא יָבֹא וְלֹא יִטַּמָּא. וּלְשׁוֹן סִפְרָא (אמור ב ד) חִיֵּב בְּלֹא יָבֹא וְחִיֵּב בְּלֹא יִטַּמָּא. וּכְמוֹ כֵן אָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (בספרא שם) שֶׁחִיֵּב כֹּהֵן הֶדְיוֹט בְּלֹא יָבֹא וְלֹא יִטַּמָּא, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִכְתַּב בּוֹ, מִדִּין גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה, כְּשֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם נֶאֶסְרוּ מֵהִטַּמֵּא בַּנֶּפֶשׁ, וּכְמוֹ שֶׁבָּא בַּגְּמָרָא. וְאָמְנָם אֵין לִמְנוֹת בְּמִנְיַן הַלָּאוִין לֹא יָבֹא וְלֹא יִטַּמָּא בְּכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט לִשְׁנֵי לָאוִין כְּמוֹ שֶׁמָּנִינוּ אוֹתָן בְּכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, לְפִי שֶׁבְּכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל נִכְתְּבוּ בְּפֵרוּשׁ, וּבַהֶדְיוֹט נִלְמַד הָאֶחָד בִּגְזֵרָה שָׁוָה, וּכְבָר הוֹרָה זָקֵן הוּא הָרַמְבַּ"ם זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה (בסהמ"צ שורש ב), שֶׁאֵין לָנוּ לִמְנוֹת בְּמִנְיַן תַּרְיָ"ג מִצְוֹת אֶלָּא הַמְּפֹרָשׁוֹת בַּכָּתוּב, אֲבָל לֹא הַנִּלְמָדוֹת בְּמִדּוֹת שֶׁהַתּוֹרָה נִדְרֶשֶׁת בָּהֶן.
That the high priest not become impure with any impurity: That the high priest not become impure — even with a dead body from among his relatives, and all the more so with all the other dead bodies in the world — with a type from the types of impurity, whether through touching or whether through carrying, as it is stated (Leviticus 21:11), “for his mother or for his father, he shall not become impure.” [This is] meaning to say, even for these which are his relatives. And even though it forbade him from becoming impure for all souls at the beginning of the verse, that is impurity of coming into the tent of a dead body, as we explained there (Sefer HaChinukh 270). As behold, there it is written, “he shall not come,” which implies coming into a tent. Whereas here all of the other types of impurity are forbidden more generally. And do not think that that which it stated, “for his father and for his mother, etc.,” is an explanation of the beginning of the verse that stated, “And for all dead souls, etc.” — as the matter is not like this. But [rather,] they are two [distinct] negative commandments, “he shall not come,” and “he shall not become impure.” And the language of Sifra, Emor, Section 2:4 is “He is liable for ‘he shall not come,’ and he is liable for ‘he shall not become impure.’” And they, may their memory be blessed likewise said, that a common priest is liable for “he shall not come,” and “he shall not become impure” — even though it is not written about him — stemming from the law of an inferential comparison; as both of them were forbidden from becoming impure with a soul, and as it appears in the Gemara. However we should not count “he shall not come” and “he shall not become impure” for a common priest as two negative commandments, such as we counted them for a high priest. [This is] as they are written explicitly with a high priest; while with a common priest, one is learned from an inferential comparison. And the elder has already instructed — that is Rambam, may his memory be blessed — that we should only count those that are explicit in Scriputre in the tally of the six hundred and thirteen commandments, but not those that are learned through the hermeneutic principles through which the Torah is expounded.
מִשָּׁרְשֵׁי הַמִּצְוָה. מָה שֶׁכָּתַבְנוּ בַּמִּצְוָה הַקּוֹדֶמֶת לָזוֹ, וְהוּא הַדִּין וְהוּא הַטַּעַם, כִּי כַּוָּנַת שְׁתֵּיהֶן בְּלֹא יָבֹא וּבְלֹא יִטַּמָּא עִנְיָן אֶחָד הוּא.
That which we wrote about the commandment preceding this is from the roots of the commandment. And it is the same law and it is the same reason; as the intention of both of them — of “he shall not come” and of “he shall not become impure” — is one matter.
וּבְדִינֵי טֻמְאַת הַמֵּת, כְּבָר כָּתַבְתִּי לְמַעְלָה בְּסֵדֶר זֶה בְּמִצְוָה רסג קְצָת מֵהֶן.
And we have already written a few of the laws of the impurity of a dead body above in this Order in Commandment 263 (Sefer HaChinukh 263).
וְנוֹהֵג אִסּוּר זֶה בִּזְמַן הַבַּיִת כִּי אָז יִהְיֶה שָׁם כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל, וּבְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁהַכֹּהֵן שָׁם, גַּם כֵּן נוֹהֵג אִסּוּר זֶה, וְאִם עָבַר וְנִטְמָא וַאֲפִילּוּ לִקְרוֹבָיו בְּמִין מִמִּינֵי הַטֻּמְאָה חַיָּב מַלְקוּת.
And this prohibition is practiced at the time of the [Temple], as then was there a high priest there. And this prohibition is also practiced in any place that the [high] priest is there. And if he transgressed and became impure with a type of the types of impurity — and even for his relatives — he is liable for lashes.