YESHIVAT HAR ETZION
ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)
*********************************************************

INTRODUCTION TO PARASHAT HASHAVUA

PARASHAT TAZRIA-METZORA

The Affliction of 'Tzara'at'
By Rav Michael Hattin

INTRODUCTION

Parashat Tazria-Metzora introduces us to what is undeniably the most difficult of topics that are addressed in Sefer Vayikra, namely the laws of debilitating skin disorders.  At great length, the Torah describes various strange ailments that may afflict an individual's body, or even his garments or house.  While the parasha opens with the laws of confinement associated with childbirth, it abruptly goes on to spell out in exhausting detail the condition of 'tzara'at,' or the one so afflicted who is referred to as the 'tzarua' or the 'metzora.'  According to the Torah's description, the malady may strike the skin, the scalp, or the beard.  It may occur in the aftermath of a previous lesion or burn.  It may afflict garments of wool or linen.  It may even strike the stones, mortar, or plaster of a house.  In all cases, it is the kohen or priest who must examine the infection and diagnose it.

A MEDICAL DISORDER?

While often identified with 'leprosy' due to the Torah's association of the illness with a whitening of the afflicted skin, no other features of a typical leprous condition are indicated in the text.  The loss of sensation, paralysis, wasting of muscle and deformity that occur as chronic leprosy progresses, are completely absent from the Torah's description of the illness, thus rendering such an identification clearly unwarranted.  Certainly, a clinical case of leprosy cannot infect articles of wool or linen, nor can it contaminate the walls of a house.  Thus, we are forced to conclude that the 'traditional' linkage of 'tzara'at' with leprosy that renders this unusual sickness into an unfortunate but natural bacterial infection, is untenable.

Significantly, the Torah is silent concerning the causes of tzara'at.  Seemingly, it strikes suddenly and without warning.  Sometimes, the kohen may be able to immediately identify the symptoms and declare the afflicted individual as 'tamei' or ritually unfit, but more often than not a seven-day incubation period is required in order to make a definitive diagnosis.  Sometimes, a further seven-day period is needed if the first quarantine fails to provide conclusive results.  In all cases, the waiting period is characterized by isolation from others, as the potential metzora, his garment or house, awaits the judgement of the kohen.

While scholars and academics have searched in vain for a medical explanation for tzara'at, the classical Jewish sources recognized early on that a meaningful explanation for the condition must be found elsewhere.  Writing in the 13th century, the Ramban (Spain) remarks that "(the tzara'at associated with garments) is not at all a natural occurrence and does not typically occur in the world, and so with respect to the plague of the house…" (commentary to Vayikra 13:47).  In other words, there is no rational explanation for these conditions, no straightforward chain of medical cause and effect that could account for them.

THE THEME OF ISOLATION

As we pointed out earlier, the features of the malady are quite multifaceted and may include the appearance of white blotches on the skin, white hairs that have sprouted on raw skin, lesions or burns that have become infected, or yellow hairs that have sprouted on the affected skin of the scalp or beard.  It is therefore difficult to isolate a common set of denominators that characterize the condition, especially in light of its aforementioned ability to infect garments and houses as well.  There is, however, a single linking textual feature that unites all of the various forms of the disorder, and it is this feature that may help us to propel our investigation forward.

The Torah indicates that whosoever is stricken with tzara'at, be it person, garment or house, must be subjected to a period of isolation and confinement.  During that duration, the afflicted individual is unable to participate in any social intercourse, is barred from entering the hallowed precincts of the Tabernacle and/or partaking of hallowed sacrificial foods and is instead effectively 'shut in.'  To quote the colorful language of the Torah's text: "The tzarua who suffers from the ailment shall have torn clothes and unkempt hair, and shall cover his face with his cloak.  He shall call out: 'Tamei, tamei!'  For as long as he is afflicted with the ailment he shall be considered as 'tamei' and shall dwell alone outside of the boundaries of the camp" (Vayikra 13:45-46).  Thus, the tzarua must proclaim to others the nature of his condition so that they might maintain their distance.  

If it is a garment that is definitively infected, as characterized by a progressive spread of the noxious discoloration, then that garment is to be burned.  If the discoloration does not spread but also does not disappear, then the garment is to be laundered and confined for a further seven days.  If no change is noted, then that garment must also be burned.  If, however, the infection has shown signs of subsiding, then the infected fibers alone must be stripped from the garment and discarded.

With respect to houses, a definitive infection results in the afflicted stones being removed and discarded outside of the camp, while a doubtful case requires a seven-day waiting period followed by a reexamination of the affected premises.  If the discoloration has in the meantime spread, then the affected stones are to be removed and discarded and a second period of seven days is to be kept.  If after the second round the malady has returned, then the entire house is to be demolished and its rubble is to be relocated outside of the camp.  Thus, taken together, the notion of isolation or confinement, whether of person, garment or house, seems to dominate the discussion of the metzora.

TUMA AND TAHARA

While it may be tempting to see in the recurring theme of isolation an expression of the medical necessity to quarantine a harmful pathogen, the ongoing involvement of the kohen as evidenced by his presumed contact with the 'infected' person or periodic entry into the contaminated premises of the afflicted house would seem to negate the possibility that harmful bacteria are the culprits.  Most telling of all, however, is the recurring term that the Torah employs to describe the consequences of the condition, for without exception, the Torah describes the condition in terms of 'tum'a' and 'tahara.'  One who is afflicted is 'tamei'; one who has recovered and presented the requisite sacrifices is 'tahor.'  

While in past years, we have discussed the true meaning of these terms at length, suffice it to say that they almost always describe a state of ritual disqualification insofar as the Tabernacle or its environs are concerned.  Thus, one who is 'tamei' may not enter the sacred precincts or partake of sacrificial foods.  It can be conclusively demonstrated that 'tum'a' and 'tahara' have nothing to do with physical hygiene or medical health, and everything to do with subtle spiritual states.  The fact that the Torah chooses to use these terms here is another indication that tzara'at must be understood as something other than a medical condition.

THE PRECEDENT OF MIRIAM

How then to comprehend the unusual condition of tzara'at?  By linking together the theme of isolation, the designation of 'tum'a,' and an explicit and decisive Biblical reference, Rabbinic tradition was able to convincingly explain many aspects of the disorder.  The Biblical reference in question was of course the episode of Miriam's affliction with the disorder, described in Sefer Bemidbar Chapter 12: 

"Miriam and Aharon spoke disparagingly of Moshe concerning the dark-skinned wife that he had taken…God heard…The man Moshe was exceedingly humble, more so than any person on the face of the earth.  Suddenly, God addressed Moshe, Aharon and Miriam saying: 'all three of you go out to the Tent of Meeting'…God descended in a pillar of cloud and hovered at the opening of the tent.  He called Aharon and Miriam and both of them approached.  He said: 'hear my words.  If there is a prophet among you, I appear to him in a vision or else in a dream.  Not so with respect to My servant Moshe, for he is most loyal in all of My house…why were you not afraid to speak against My servant Moshe?'  God was angry with them and He departed.  The cloud lifted off of the tent, and behold Miriam was as 'metzoraat' as snow.  Aharon turned towards Miriam, and behold she was 'metzoraat'…Moshe cried out to God saying: 'Almighty, please heal her now!'  God said to Moshe: 'if her father had spit in her face would she not be ashamed for seven days?  Let her be isolated outside of the camp for seven days and only then readmitted.  So Miriam was shut out of the camp for seven days, but the people did not travel onwards until she was readmitted…" (12:1-16).

The exact nature and content of Miriam's verbal broadside need not concern us here.  What is important for our purposes is to recognize that she was guilty of employing hurtful words, that Moshe her brother was offended by them, and that in consequence God's presence departed form her, leaving the terrible affliction of tzara'at in its wake.

THE UNIFYING FORMULATION OF THE RAMBAM

Here again in the case of Miriam, we have many of the 'classical' features of the tzara'at condition: a harmful and horrifying skin disorder that precipitates a stern exclusion from the camp of Israel, until such time as 'healing' takes place. Here, as in our parasha, that time is designated as a period of seven days.  The overall effect is therefore to suggest a consistent connection between the two passages, lopsided in length though they may be.  The episode of Miriam, however, provides us with two additional and critical details: firstly, according to the text, her sudden affliction is brought upon her through her misuse of the powers of speech in order to speak ill of her brother.  Secondly, there is an express linkage that is implied between the departure of God's protective presence and the onset of the affliction, as if to suggest that tzara'at is a function of becoming spiritually distant from the Deity. 

It is the Rambam (12th century, Egypt) who weaves together the various strands of our investigation to fashion a cohesive idea, which he presents as a fitting conclusion to his lengthy and detailed codification of the laws of tzara'at (Laws of Tum'at Tzara'at, 16:10):

"Tzara'at is a general term that includes many distinct conditions that differ one from the other.  A whitening of human skin is called 'tzara'at,' a loss of some scalp or beard hair may be 'tzara'at,' and a discoloration of garments or the house is 'tzara'at.'  This condition that afflicts garments or houses to which the Torah refers by this term is not a natural occurrence but rather a miraculous sign that would transpire in ancient Israel in order TO DISSUADE THEM FROM ENGAGING IN EVIL TALK ('lashon hara').  Thus, if one engaged in disparaging speech, then the walls of his house would become discolored.  If he repented, then the walls would recover, but if he persisted, then…the garments upon him would be afflicted…if he persisted, then his very skin would be stricken and he would be publicly SEPARATED AND ISOLATED so that he would be unable to engage in the chatter of the wicked, namely foolish words and evil speech.  Concerning this very thing, the Torah warned when it said: 'Observe diligently the laws of tzara'at…remember what God your Lord did to Miriam on the way as you left the land of Egypt…' (Bemidbar 24:8-9).

REINTERPRETING THE BIBLICAL TEXT

Thus, although left unstated in our parasha, the underlying cause of tzara'at is not a harmful microbe but rather flawed and immoral behavior.  To speak ill of someone else is to tear asunder the social fabric that binds people together in relationships of trust.  It is to drive a wedge between oneself and God.  As a fitting and telling consequence, therefore, the tzarua is relocated to the outside of the camp where he must dwell in complete isolation, far from family, friends and the sacred enclosure of God's sanctuary, until such time as he relents and recognizes the danger to personal, communal and religious relationships that his evil speech engenders.  

The three sites that can be infected by the illness, the house, garment, and the body, are thus understood not as reflecting disparate and unrelated strains of the malady, but rather as representing an instructive exercise in progression: to fail to desist from destructive conduct is to invite disaster.  But that disaster, because it is here a function of spiritual failings rather than the cruel hand of arbitrary and malignant fate, unfolds as a process that offers the victim an opportunity to mend his ways and thus avert harsher consequences.

The 'tum'a' designation is a clear indication that the Torah is concerned with spiritual and ethical categories of behavior, for the term almost invariably describes a flawed spiritual state of being that limits one's access to God's Tabernacle.  Similarly, the kohen diagnoses the 'disorder' not because he is the ancient and ineffective equivalent of the physician but rather because he is typically called upon to provide religious instruction, spiritual guidance and the possibility of repairing one's relationship with others and with God.

CONCLUSION

Significantly, Rambam's formulation, founded upon the bedrock of Rabbinic exegesis as cited in Talmud Bavli Arachin 15a-16a et al, has the important consequence of transforming a rare and unusual health disorder into a common and insidious character defect.  The detailed description of the illness in its various forms that is preserved in the Torah, a lengthy listing that seems to imply a general and pervasive pathogen, is now more comprehensible: the underlying cause of the condition, hurtful words and mean-spirited speech, is truly widespread and endemic.

Tzara'at as a medical condition may no longer be evident or identifiable in our day, but as with other seemingly archaic and atavistic laws of the Book of Vayikra, the OBJECT LESSON of tzara'at, as understood by our tradition, is as pertinent as ever.  In the Torah's estimation, it is only within the framework of isolation and aloneness, of being forcibly removed from man's company and God's presence, that the terribly malevolent effects of evil speech can be appreciated.  Words can hurt and words can kill, and nothing is as detrimental to healthy and loving human relationships and interactions as 'lashon hara' in all of its forms.  

Shabbat Shalom