|
|
|
|
|
Parshat
Tazria: The Causes of Tzara'at Most people
enjoy reading about the disease of Tzara'at about as much as they enjoy
visiting the dentist! We read the Torah text about white patches and red
blotches on the skin, bodily inflammations and distortions; examinations
by a Kohen, the ejection of the "leper" from the Israelite
camp. And obviously questions come to mind as to the logic behind these
intricate technical chapters of ritual law. This week we
shall pay attention to the unusual STRUCTURE of the parsha, and through
its examination we shall emerge with a clearer understanding of the
SPIRITUAL underpinnings of Tzaraat. Chavruta Study: THE STRUCTURE
OF THE PARSHA: Read through
the parsha (from 13:1 to 14:57). A superficial review should suffice. Give a heading
to each section / paragraph. ·
What types af Tzara'at are joined together? ·
What type of Tzaraat is clearly put into a separate section? - Can you give
a reason for this? FOR
FURTHER STUDY: a. What colour
is Tzara'at? See: - Shemot 4:6,
Bamidbar 12:10, Melachim II 5:27. But in our
parsha other colours are evident: 13:9-17, 13:24, 13:30, 13:49. b. For a
philosophical view, see the Rambam: Mishne Torah , Hilchot Tumaat
Tzara'at (in Sefer Tahara) Chap 16.
Halacha 10. Shiur: When looking at
the Biblical "unit" which is defined by our Parshiot, we can
denote a clear symmetrical (or "chiastic") structure with the
laws of Tzara'at at the centre of two areas of purity laws. i.
Ch.12
Purity laws of the mother after childbirth ii.
Ch.13-14
Tzara'at iii.
Ch.15
Purity laws of Nidda and Zavva But internally,
there is some confusion as to the appropriate place of each parsha: i.
13:1-46
Tzara'at of the body ii.13:47-59
Tzara'at of Clothing iii.14:1-32
Purification process for Tzara'at of the body iv.14:33-57
Tzara'at of Houses - and its purification The topics here
seem somewhat out of order! Should we not first describe the three types
of Tzara'at: body, clothing, house, and then move on to the process of
purification? Why does the purification process interrupt the list of
Tzara'at types? The grouping is
interesting too. We see that Tzara'at of clothing is grouped with the
Tzara'at of the body. This might seem sensible. However we have to ask
whether there is logical connection here. I say this because in a way,
these two types of tzara'at (body/ clothing) do not share the same
properties. Why? Because clothing that is "infected' must be
disposed of; it is burnt. But the procedure for both the human body is
one of repair. In fact, if we look at the "recovery" process,
the body has more in common with the house. With both, there is a
process of repair and recovery. Thus House Tzara'at is closer in its
treatment to Human Tzara'at than Tzara'at of clothes. Why are they not
placed in direct proximity to each other? Why is the
Tzara'at of a house detached and deliberately separated from the details
of human Tzara'at? THE LAND OF
ISRAEL For those of
you who have looked into the pesukim, you will immediately notice a clue
in the text. The opening line of Parshat Tzara'at Habayit gives us the
beginnings of an answer. In general when learning Tanach, opening verses
(headers) and concluding verses to parshiot will frequently assist us in
defining the place or context of a particular parsha. This time too, we
find that the heading assists us in understanding the structure. We read
(14:34): "When
you enter the Land of Canaan which I am giving to you as possession, and
I will place the Tzara'at plague upon your homes of the Land of your
possession..." The passuk is
suggesting that the plague which affects the house is limited to the
holy land. How are we to understand this? Why is this Tzaraat limited to
a particular locale? Rashi - quoting
the Midrash - offers quite an interesting suggestion. The Midrash reads
this opening verse quite literally, as if it were a promise: "When
you come into the land - I will put Tzara'at on your homes!" What
sort of a promise is that? "This
is a promise of good tidings... because the inhabitants of Canaan hid
their treasures in the walls of their homes during the 40 years of
wandering. Now, through the plague the wall is knocked out and the
treasures discovered." This rather
fantastic Midrash suggests that the entire House Tzara'at is a ploy by
God to help the Israelites locate "buried treasure". The
Canaanites, worried about an impending invasion, hid their precious
possessions in their walls (wall safes were around then too!). After the
conquest of Canaan, when the Jews are living in their homes, the
Tzara'at plague will come as a blessing to expose the treasure. This
explanation also answers our question. The Tzara'at of the body and
clothing are "bad" tzara'at, but this Tzara'at of homes is
positive; a blessing. Hence the division. This approach
is interesting, but from a perspective of "p'shat", it would
seem rather strange. After all, Tzara'at is described as a
"plague" (Neg'a)! It is a punishment of sorts. Miriam was
affected for talking badly about her brother. The king Uzziyahu is also
punished with Tzara'at (Chronicles II 26:15-20). How can it be seen as a
blessing? The ibn Ezra
(14:34) offers a more realistic approach: "This
classification of (House) Tzara'at manifests itself in the Land of
Israel exclusively, due to the elevated status of the land and the
Divine presence which is manifest in the Temple." So God's
intense presence in the land means that Tzara'at doesn't just
"hit" close to the person: in his body and clothing. Rather it
affects even a person's wider surroundings. Some use this
verse to explain and understand the division of "House Tzara'at"
They suggest (see Hirsch for example) that clearly Tzara'at of clothes
and body affected the Israelites in the wilderness, but Tzara'at of the
House was applicable only after 40 years, hence the division. But even
this explanation is somewhat unfulfilling. Torah laws are interspersed
irrespective of whether they are laws limited to the boundaries of the
Land of Israel or not! REVERSE
MECHANISMS. But maybe, we
can answer our question with an understanding of the mechanism for each
Tzara'at and we will realise that the Tzara'at of the body and the
Tzara'at of the home are very different in their message. Let us try to
visualise the process which the unfortunate victim goes through for each
case. Someone sees a white blotch on his skin or some other symptom of
Tzara'at. He calls for a Kohen. The Kohen might put him on hold for a
week or two and if it is diagnosed as being Tzara't he must leave the
"camp" or the town for an entire week. For a week, he lives
outside any societal structure, away from people, and only afterwards
does he re-enter the camp but a protracted process of purification is
begun which takes a week. The focus here would seem to be his exclusion
from society (as with Miriam.) He is temporarily ejected. For a week he
must become an outsider, an outcast. He sits on the outside, alone,
secluded, looking in. But with the
House Tzara'at, he never leaves the town. He is not excluded from
society. What happens in this situation? The priest is called when
certain coloured markings are noticed on the walls of the house. Before
the Kohen begins his examination of the house, the house contents are
emptied so that the furniture and home contents do not become
"impure". If and when the "plague" is diagnosed, the
house walls must be broken down in the infected spot and replaced with
new stones. No-one is allowed to enter the house until we are sure that
the Tzara'at has not spread. Maybe the
contrast can be expressed most poignantly by the following statement in
the Gemara (Yoma 11b): "He
who keeps his house to himself, not wanting to lend his possessions to
others, telling people that he does not have; God exposes him by taking
all his house contents out of his home." House Tzara'at
throws a person INTO society. The victim of Tzara'at is forced to a
certain degree of personal exposure in the public eye. All the
neighbours watch the removal van coming. They see the Kohen inspector
pile all the house contents at the side of the street. The person who
claimed that he could not lend to his neighbours, that he did not have
the means to take up his share of responsibility for society, this
person is now forced to stride, in broad daylight, outside of his
protective walls. The House Tzara'at pushes a person out of his house -
his ivory tower - and forcibly confronts him with his townsfolk. He must
find a new place to live for a while, in the town. He must connect with
others, maybe even move in with another family. The walls of his house
has been broken down in more ways than one. This Tzara'at
then, is a test of our personal space, our privacy. In the Talmud, it is
seen as a punishment for someone who refuses to act in the most
elementary neighbourly fashion. This person won't lend a broom, or a cup
of milk to his neighbours. He won't participate in communal life. He
wants his privacy, and more than that, he doesn't want anyone to know
what he really has. He keeps to himself and doesn't want anyone to
bother him. The walls of his home are the focus here. These walls do not
simply ensure his privacy, they seclude him in an impermeable membrane
so that he can live for himself and by himself. No societal concern is
his concern. We wonder what leads him to this anti-social behaviour. How
did he become so aloof, so selfish? Is it so bad if somebody uses his
plate? his lawnmower? Are we so protective of what is ours, so
entrenched in personal ownership? Why do we value our material
possessions over our social responsibility? But the
opposite is true for the Tzara'at of the body. Here the victim is
secluded from society. This victim is put into isolation for a week. He
has to sit alone, outside the support system and social set-up of the
community. He is being taught a lesson by being pushed AWAY from
society. TWO SINS. The Midrash (Devarim
Rabba 6:8) supports our observations and links these two types of
Tzara'at to two specific sins. "Rabbi
Meir says ... For what sin do plagues come? For selfish behaviour... A
person asks his neighbour 'lend me an axe to cut some wood'. He replies,
'I don't have one', out of his selfish disposition (lit. ayin ra'ah -
evil eye); 'lend me your sieve?'. He has one, but replies 'I don't own
one', immediately his home is attacked by the plague ... and they empty
his house contents, axes, sieves and all! Rabbi
Hanina says: Plagues visit a person because of slander (lashon hara),
for Miriam the righteous' slander of her brother Moses brought her to
the plague." Lashon Hara
gives you bodily Tzara'at. Selfishness leads to home Tzara'at. How might
we explain this difference? Lashon Hara is
when a person oversteps the boundary of his own personal space and
enters the world of another, intruding into their life uninvited, to
critique and comment about matters which should be of no concern to him Selfishness is
the opposite motion. A person recedes into their own four walls,
ignoring the basic assistance he can offer to others. This person will
not be harmed in any way by lending an object to another. It is true;
maybe the neighbour will damage the sieve or the axe. Is it not safer
just to keep it for me? If I keep to myself, I can retain my neat
perfect world! Selfishness is when I do not know how to give to the
world. The punishment
fits the crime. The selfish person is taught to be less up tight, to
realise that he can live in a social sharing environment. The slanderous
person is taught that he can exist outside society. He doesn't need to
comment on someone else's life this week. He can live by himself without
prying into anyone's life, and he will still survive the week. He can
look at society from the outside, with no-one to tell, just thinking
about how everyone, including himself, has things the one wishes to
remain private. A SPIRITUAL
AILMENT Chazal refused
to accept that Tzaraat could be identified with Leprosy. Leprosy is a
biological disease; Tzara'at is a biblical, spiritual disease. Indeed,
the Rambam expresses clearly that this is NOT a physical phenomena but
rather a spiritual one: הצרעת
הוא שם האמור
בשותפות
כולל
עניינים
הרבה שאין
דומין זה לזה,
שהרי לובן
עור האדם
קרוי צרעת,
ונפילת קצת
שיער הראש או
הזקן קרוי
צרעת, ושינוי
עין הבגדים
או הבתים
קרוי צרעת, וזה
השינוי
האמור
בבגדים
ובבתים
שקראתו תורה
צרעת
בשותפות השם
אינו ממנהגו
של עולם אלא
אות ופלא היה
בישראל כדי
להזהירן
מלשון הרע (רמב"ם
הלכות טומאת
צרעת פרק טז
הלכה י) "Tzaraat is an umbrella term given to a variety of physical symptoms: The white of human skin, the loss of hair of the head or beard, or colour change in garments or walls of a structure. These colour changes affecting clothes and homes … are not natural biological phenomena, but rather a spiritual omen for the Jewish people…" This
"disease" strikes people with an "unhealthy" social
attitude. It doesn't seem to be a medical condition at all! Obviously,
if it were physical, one would visit a doctor, or a structural engineer,
not a Kohein! (And even if one would think that in ancient times, one
visited a holy man for even physical ailments, the address for that was
generally the prophet and not the Priest whose domain was exclusively
the Mikdash.) In an age where
sensational gossip sells millions of magazines and newspapers, when
personal privacy is regularly ignored, when language has been cheapened
and abused, let our parsha inspire us to more responsible social living. Shabbat
Shalom. (Revised
5766) To investigate
the topic further, you might wish to read two stoies that each should
shed some light on our problem: 1. Miriam:
Bamidbar. Chapter 12 and Devarim 24:8-9 2. Na'aman:
Melachim II. Chapter 5 (- not so well known because we usually read the
Haftara of Metzora and not Tazria.) For each story
examine what is going on, the role of Tzara'at etc. If you cannot come
up with your own questions, then the following might just be of some
assistance: ·
What is the "problem" or "sin" in each case? ·
How is the Tzara'at dealt with? ·
Does the "resolution" seem to solve the problem? What does this
story tell you about the phenomena we call Tzara'at? Some pointers
based upon the shiur above… The story of
Miriam clearly illustrates the Lashon Hara example. The story is
startling in the suddenness and severity of God's response. The text
never reveals to us the content of her comments regarding Moshe or his
wife, but we deduce from the story that what she whispered to Aaron was
some sort of criticism. This type of talk was grossly inappropriate when
applied to the "Man of God". God's immediate summons and his
swift punishment are striking. Was He trying to "contain" the
rumour, preventing a bad word about Moses from spreading around the
Israelite camp? Or are there other reasons here? God's rebuke
talks about one thing only. It can be summarised in one phrase: Moses is
different. God is saying to Miriam, "You think you can intrude on
Moses' life with your standards? - You are wrong. You are not party to
his mindset." The story of
Na'aman in Sefer Melachim illustrates the other side of Tzara'at.
Na'aman, the proud army general will not lower his proud demeanour and
bathe in the Jordan River. He exclaims, "I thought that he (the
Navi) would approach me and wave his hand calling in the name of God and
the Tzara'at would be gone! Are ... the rivers of Damascus not superior
to all the rivers of Israel? ... He left in a temper." (5:11-12).
The test here is whether he can do exactly that, to lower his pride,
strip down and dip seven times I the unimpressive Jordan river. Na'aman
wants a grand dignified cleansing of his plague. But it is only by
lowering himself that he can become cured of his Tzara'at.
|
|||
|
|
|||||||