Archive for the ‘27. Tazria’ Category

Out like a leper

The Torah explains how to diagnose a metzora, someone stricken with tzaraas: וְרָאָה הַכֹּהֵן וְהִנֵּה כִסְּתָה הַצָּרַעַת אֶת כָּל בְּשָׂרוֹ וְטִהַר אֶת הַנָּגַע כֻּלּוֹ הָפַךְ לָבָן טָהוֹר הוּא – The kohen should check the white mark. If it has cleared from his skin, it is purified. If it has spread and infected his entire body white, he too is purified. (13:13)

If the mark was not purified, the man was sent away from the city for a week.

Tzaraas should not be thought of as a physical disease, for which the metzora was quarantined. If it were so, what of the man whose entire body was stricken? Think of it as a spiritual shortcoming that is physically manifest, for which the metzora is isolated through solitary confinement.

The isolation is a critical part of being cured, but why?

The cause of tzaraas is gossip, which the Torah is highly sensitive to. Gossip is a highly destructive force, tearing apart the fabric of society by planting harmful ideas, destroying perceptions and relationships. The metzora must leave the community because tzaraas can be hidden otherwise – symbolic of how the gossip himself is able to blend into society when he is actually destroying it. This person is not what he seems – or in other words, a fake – and since he can blend, people are not on their guard. The Rema explains that this is not the case with the person whose entire body is stricken – their physical condition matches their spiritual condition – people know to steer well clear of such a person, and this metzora can therefore stay in the city.

Solitary confinement may seem a little extreme, but R’ Yisrael Salanter explains that the punishment fits the crime; the gossip – if telling the truth – is exacting over the finer details of other peoples lives. Such an expert is forced to confront his own character flaws by being exposed to only himself for a week, to rectify his own wrongdoings.

Later on, where the parsha addresses tzaraas affecting the clothing, the Torah reveals a fundamental idea, key to the entire portion of the metzora: וְרָאָה הַכֹּהֵן (…) וְהִנֵּה לֹא הָפַךְ הַנֶּגַע אֶת עינו – The kohen should check, and if the eye of the mark had not reverted… (13:55).

The point of the purification process of a metzora is for the eye to revert. Figuratively speaking, the character flaw that causes tzaraas is the eye that looks at others. At the end of his isolation, his eye should be fixed firmly on his own actions and dealings.

The Divrei Shaul points out how this reflects the Mishna in Avos, that identifies a person with a favourable eye as one of the students of Avraham Avinu, and an evil eye as a student of Bilam. If the metzora’s eye has not been fixed, he cannot end his isolation, because he is not ready to integrate into society.

Around the time the State of Israel was founded, many Jews were fighting and dying every day. A student exclaimed to the Brisker Rov how, “It’s the secular people’s fault! If they kept Shabbos surely no one would die!”.
The Brisker Rov dismissed his foolishness, “When the prophet, Yonah, fled rather than chastise the Jews’ sins – he blamed himself and preferred to be thrown off a boat – בשלי הסער הגדול הזה! Even if the entire nation were idol worshippers like then, we don’t look to others for accountability, we say בשלי הסער הגדול הזה – this great storm is all my fault. A Jew’s job is not to judge, but only to say, “How can I make it better?”".

Print/Pdf

I’ve got to break free

With korbanos, the sacrifices, there is a concept within certain categories of korban called olah v’yored – where the animal offered will vary, dependent on the person’s status. For example, Parshas Tazria deals with a woman who gives birth – olah v’yored applies, and as such, a woman from a wealthy family offers a חטאת and עולה of sheep, and a woman from a poor family offers a חטאת and עולה of doves.

But what if a poor person decides to save up, and instead of bringing the doves, he chooses to offer a wealthy man’s offering of sheep/cows? In other words; are people confined to their social status?

The halacha according to all is that if a wealthy man were to bring a poor man’s offering of doves, he has definitely not fulfilled his obligation. So the, olah v’yored applies to the animals, and it applies to the supplicant if he attempts to downgrade his responsibility. So the question becomes: can a person upgrade their responsibility?

The Sefer Hachinuch says that a poor person who upgrades his sacrifice from the birds to the cows has not fulfilled his obligation. The Rambam disputes this, and says that he has.

What is the basis of the dispute?

There is a story told about R’ Meir Schapira, at a gathering of all the pre-war Gedolim. He presented this very question, and asked how the Sefer HaChinuch could suggest he hadn’t fulfilled his obligation, possibly contradicting various Gemaras.

Present at the gathering, was the Imrei Emes, the Gerrer Rebbe. He simply muttered, “there is a missing korban”. Those gathered were puzzled what the Rebbe had meant. Among his attending disciples was R’ Menachem Zemba of Warsaw, a renowned genius, who took the floor. “Let us analyse where the Sefer HaChinuch says his halacha. There are 6 applications of the concept of olah v’yored:”

1. A ritually impure person who enters the area of the Beis haMikdash

2. A ritually impure person who eats kodshim (produce set aside for kohanim)

4. A person who falsely swears he did not witness an event, thereby avoiding needing to testify

5. A woman who gives birth

6. A person stricken with tzara’as (a metzora)

“5+6 are different. The wealthy person brings one animal, as does the poor person. Not so in 1-4, delineated in Parshas Vayikra, wherein the wealthy person only bring the חטאת , and no עולה , thereby only needing one animal. The Gemara that the Sefer HaChinuch seemed to go against, that a poor person who brings a rich mans offering has indeed fulfilled his obligation, was regarding 5+6, where there were two animals, brought by both the rich and poor.”

“However, in Parshas Vayikra, where the pasuk discusses cases 1-4, it is insufficient for a poor person to bring a wealthy man’s offering – he’s missing an animal!”

“The Ibn Ezra discusses the possible causes for the discrepancy in how many animals a person would bring, based on his social standing.”

“1. A poor man would by definition be unhappy with his standing in life, and he would bear a grudge against Heaven for his misfortune. This necessitates an additional animal.”

“2. A wealthy person’s offering has a large enough portion to burn on the Mizbeach by itself, a cow is a very large animal. Not so with a bird, with a woefully small portion to burn. It is disrespectful to offer such a miniscule portion, and this necessitates a whole new animal to satisfice the demands of the Mizbeach.”

The genius continued; “So the Sefer HaChinuch would agree with the first possibility. It doesn’t help for a poor person, who must bring the second to atone for his grudge against Heaven, to bring one animal. He has not addressed this feeling within, and as the Rebbe said, there is a korban missing.”

However, the Rambam would hold with the second option, that the second animal is not brought because of the person, but rather, by the nature of the animal being offered. If he were to bring a cow, there would be no need for a second animal, and he would indeed have fulfilled his responsibility!

Print/Pdf

Torah as part of creation

דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר אִשָּׁה כִּי תַזְרִיעַ - Speak to the children of Israel, saying: If a woman conceives…. (12:2)

Rashi comments:

אשה כי תזריע : אמר ר’ שמלאי כשם שיצירתו של אדם אחר כל בהמה חיה ועוף במעשה בראשית, כך תורתו נתפרשה אחר תורת בהמה חיה ועוף – If a woman conceives: Rabbi Simlai said: “Just as in the Creation, man was created after all domestic animals, wild beasts, and birds, so too, the law [concerning the cleanness] of man is stated after the law [concerning the cleanness] of domestic animals, wild beasts, and birds.”- [Vayikra Rabbah 14:1]

Theoretically, man should have been created before animals, as man is the focus of existence.

The Gemara (Sanhedrin 38a)  gives 4 reasons why man was created after everything else: 1. That if man becomes haughty and arrogant, he can be told that even the insignificant mosquito too precedence in creation. 2. People might speculate that since man would have preceded everything, he is somehow on par with G-d. 3. It is not fitting for man, the focal point of existence, to come into an emtpy world. 4. It is fitting for man’s existence to start with the observance of Shabbos.

R’ Simlai says that כשם – just like - man was secondary to the creation of animals at Genesis, here too. But the problem is, it’s not just as at all! We can’t say that the reason that the laws of man are secondary to the laws of animals in our parsha due to it being fitting to begin existence with Shabbos (4), or that the world should not be empty (3). The reasons given for Creation don’t seem relevant at all here, so how is it כשם – just like ? R’ Simlai should have said כיון – since - which simply indicates they are reflecting each other superficially ie in order.

R’ Yehoshua Hartman expounds on how the Maharal explains this. In Bereishis, (and kiddush) we say יום השישי - and Rashi there wonders why the definite article – ה - is used there, and not by any of the other days. There are two explanantions Rashi provides: 1. the ה (numerical value 5) is what are attention should be drawn to, the 5 books of the Chumash – that creation was completed, and there was a condition that the Jews had to accept the Torah. 2. The definite article is drawing attention to what we are defnining –  שישי - the sixth, of Sivan, Shavuos, the day the Torah was given to us. That sixth day was the completion of creation, and up until that point, existence was not ascertained yet, and risked being undone if the Jews had not accepted the Torah. So what’s the difference between these two explanations? Both say that existence is dependent on accepting the Torah?

Not at all. The first possibility meant that creation was over 6 days from when it started. The second possibility means that creation was finished when we accepted the Torah – this means that Torah is the quintessence of Beriah – it is the crescendo of creation. This means that whatever happens in the Beriah happens in the Torah, as the two are inextricably linked – existence depends on the Torah as an anchor.

It is logical to say that the world was incomplete until the Torah was given – there was a Yetzer Hara, yet no Torah with which to fight it.

This means that the word כשם – just like is exactly the right word to use, as whatever is applicable to creation is applicable here, because Torah is part and parcel of existence.

 

Print/Pdf

Man: pinnacle of Creation or anticlimax?

The Parsha begins with elaborations on laws pertaining to human purity:

דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר אִשָּׁה כִּי תַזְרִיעַ - Speak to the children of Israel, saying: If a woman conceives…. (12:2)

Rashi comments:

אשה כי תזריע : אמר ר’ שמלאי כשם שיצירתו של אדם אחר כל בהמה חיה ועוף במעשה בראשית, כך תורתו נתפרשה אחר תורת בהמה חיה ועוף – If a woman conceives: Rabbi Simlai said: “Just as in the Creation, man was created after all domestic animals, wild beasts, and birds, so too, the law [concerning the cleanness] of man is stated after the law [concerning the cleanness] of domestic animals, wild beasts, and birds.”- [Vayikra Rabbah 14:1]

The Gemara (Sanhedrin 38a) explores why the creation of man followed the creation of birds and beasts. It concludes that “אחור קודם צרתני – you were formed first and last” (Tehillim 139:5). What does this mean? If a man is worthy, we say he preceded Creation, but if he is a sinner, we say that even a mosquito was created before him, so he has nothing to be arrogant about, given that even minuscule entities such as the mosquito were created before him.

However, this is difficult to comprehend – “If a man is worthy, we say he preceded Creation” – if we examine the reality, man was created last, on the 6th day of Creation, so how are we to understand the Gemara?
(more…)

Print/Pdf

ראש חודש ניסן

This Weeks Parsha

Israel: Bechukosai

Categories