ויקרא, פרק י״ג, פסוק נ״ה

After two weeks of quarantine and a thorough washing, a suspected garment faces its final judgment. The priest examines the fabric to see if the affliction has faded, revealing a stubborn reality: sometimes, the sheer lack of change is enough to condemn something to destruction. Although the garment undergoes a vigorous physical washing with cleaning agents, the affliction stubbornly behaves as if it were only washed in appearance, remaining entirely unaffected [אבן עזרא, ביאור יש״ר, רד צ הופמן].

The priest specifically looks to see if the mark has altered its color or overall appearance [שד״ל, בכור שור, שטיינזלץ]. There are different ways to understand this lack of change. Some explain that the mark simply did not fade or darken from its original state [רש״י]. The primary approach among commentators, however, clarifies that the issue is the failure to shift to a pure color [פרדס יוסף, ביאור יש״ר]. This raises a question about a mark that changes from one impure color to another, such as from greenish to reddish. The Sages maintain that as long as the color remains in the impure category, the affliction is considered unchanged and the garment is impure. Conversely, Rabbi Judah views this color shift as an entirely new affliction, which requires starting a fresh week of quarantine [מזרחי, גור אריה, רד צ הופמן].

If the mark has not spread, the garment remains impure; naturally, if it actually did spread—a far more severe sign of impurity—it must be burned [רש״י, שפתי חכמים]. The requirement to destroy the entire garment stems from the deep-seated nature of the affliction. One perspective notes that the mark appears sunken and embedded deep within the fabric's weave [רש״י, תורה תמימה, רד צ הופמן, ביאור יש״ר]. Another approach explains that the affliction represents active rot and decay. Because it actively corrupts the entire garment, simply tearing out the infected patch is insufficient; the whole item must be consumed by fire [רשב״ם, הטור הארוך, דעת זקנים, בכור שור].

Concepts of human baldness are applied to the fabric to describe the affliction's location. The first approach relates to the physical sides of the garment: the back or inner side, which rests against the human body and is more prone to trouble, is contrasted with the outer, front-facing side [אבן עזרא, העמק דבר, שטיינזלץ, רד צ הופמן]. A second view connects these concepts to age and wear, suggesting that the bald areas are old, worn-out sections where threads have rubbed away, whereas the contrasting areas are new and intact [רש״י, קיצור בעל הטורים, תורה תמימה]. A third perspective offers a simple distinction between naturally hairy or textured areas of the fabric and completely smooth sections [הטור הארוך, בכור שור, חזקוני].

Applying these human characteristics draws a direct conceptual link between human and fabric afflictions. Some commentators learn from this connection that just as a person whose affliction erupts to cover their entire body is surprisingly declared pure, a garment entirely consumed by the affliction is also rendered pure [רש״י, תורה תמימה, רד צ הופמן]. However, others point out a sharp contrast between the two: while a human requires a definitive, active sign of impurity to be declared impure, a garment can be condemned to the fire simply by standing still and remaining stubbornly unchanged [שטיינזלץ].