Summarized by Mordechai Simbol. Translated by David Strauss
Which are the more serious transgressions?
Parashot Tazria-Metzora deal with the disease of tzara'at, which is clearly not a natural disease, but rather has a spiritual cause. But it is not so clear which transgression brings about the disease of tzara'at.
When we read the Torah, it seems that the attitude towards sins between man and God is very different from the attitude towards sins between man and his fellow. For sins between man and God, and especially those involving desecration of the holy, there are very severe punishments – lashes, excision, and judicial execution. On the other hand, for sins between man and his fellow, there are almost no punishments at all. A thief is not subject to punishment; all he has to do is return the stolen item. The rapist, who today would receive a severe punishment, by Torah law is required only to pay fifty shekels. Even when the offender is subject to monetary punishment, he can admit his guilt and thereby be exempt – "One who admits to liability for a fine is exempt." It would appear that according to the Torah, transgressions between man and God are far more serious than those between man and his fellow.
The prophets come and turn the whole thing around. In the books of the Prophets, the prophets repeatedly emphasize that the commandments and transgressions between man and his fellow are no less important and serious than those between man and God, and this theme continues to appear in the writings of Chazal in many places. Among other places, we find in the words of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya: "For transgressions between man and God, Yom Kippur procures atonement. For transgressions between man and his fellow, Yom Kippur does not procure atonement, until he pacifies his fellow" (Yoma 85b).
There is one instance in which the Torah itself shows us the severity of sins between man and his fellow, and that is tzara'at. An examination of the cases in the Bible where people are afflicted with tzara'at indicates that tzara'at came about in the wake of haughtiness – a general moral problem, but one that also manifests itself in a lack of concern for the person in front of you. Chazal reinforced this point, associating the punishment of tzara'at with evil talk (lashon hara) in particular.
We will consider examples of this in the Bible:
Miriam
The well-known example of tzara'at following lashon hara in the Torah is the story of Miriam, who spoke against Moshe "because of the Cushite woman whom he had married, for he had married a Cushite woman" (Bamidbar 12:1). It would appear that the "Cushite woman" is Tzippora, whom Moshe married in Midyan, as we find in the Bible that these place-names are connected: "I see the tents of Cushan in affliction; the curtains of the land of Midyan do tremble" (Chabakuk 3:7). Miriam apparently criticized Moshe for having married a Midyanite, out of concern that Moshe's sons would not be fit to join the congregation of Israel. This statement could have had serious repercussions – it could have led to the disintegration of Moshe's family.
Geichazi
Geichazi and his sons were afflicted with the tzara'at of Na'aman. The prophecy in II Melakhim 5 was stated against the background of Aram's war against Israel, in the course of which Aram took Israelite captives as slaves. Na'aman goes to Elisha to be cleansed of his tzara'at. At the end of the purification process, Na'aman wishes to give Elisha gifts. Elisha flatly refuses to accept them and does not yield to Na'aman's entreaties. In contrast, Geichazi pursues Na'aman and demands "a talent of silver and two sets of clothes" (II Melakhim 5:22). This seems to be a considerable amount of money, for according to Elisha's words to Geichazi after the incident, it would appear that this money could have been used to buy "clothes and oliveyards and vineyards and sheep and oxen and men-servants and maid-servants" (ibid. v. 26).
Geichazi was severely reprimanded for this action – Elisha cursed him that "the leprosy of Na'aman shall cleave to you and to your seed forever" (ibid. v. 27). Chazal went further and counted him as one of the four common people who have no portion in the world-to-come – together with the wicked Bil'am; Doeg the Edomite, who murdered all the people of Nov, the city of the priests; and Achitofel, who advised Avshalom to sleep with David's concubines in the sight of all of Israel (Sanhedrin 90a).
What exactly was Geichazi's sin? He lived at a time when the people of Israel were in great trouble, and he took advantage of Israel's situation for his own personal gain. In addition, Geichazi swore in the name of God when he went to ask for things from Na'aman. This is something for which it is inappropriate to use the name of God – a “false oath,” in the language of the Mishna.
The Four Metzora'im
The next story dealing with metzora'im is found in the haftara for Parashat Metzora – II Melakhim 7. There we read of the great distress in Shomron, which is being besieged by the army of the king of Aram and in which there is a terrible famine; people are dying in the streets, and women are cooking their children. The haftara tells us of four metzora'im outside the city, who Chazal identify as Geichazi and his three sons (Sanhedrin 107b).
Later in the chapter, God causes the besieging army to flee for their lives in the middle of the night, without anyone in the city being aware of it. The four metzora'im, who had gone to the Aramean camp with the intention of defecting to them and saving their lives, find it empty of people and full of treasures and food. What do the metzora'im do at this stage? The obvious thing to do would be to go and inform the people of the city, to save the many people from dying of hunger. But what do the metzora'im do instead? "And they ate and drank, and carried away silver and gold and clothing, and went and hid it and returned; and they came back, and entered another tent, and carried away from there and went and hid it" (ibid. v. 8). Only afterwards do the metzora'im remember: "This day is a day of good tidings… now come, let us go and tell the king's household" (ibid. v. 9).
Now it is clear why Chazal identify these metzora'im with Geichazi and his three sons – because they do exactly what Geichazi did two chapters earlier: even when the people of Israel are in great distress, and people are dying every moment, the four metzora'im think first of themselves and of exploiting the situation for their own personal gain.
A day of glad tidings
In her poem "A Day of Good Tidings," Rachel the Poetess (Rachel Bluwstein Sela) writes that she would not be willing to accept good news if it comes from the mouth of a metzora.[1] These words were written from the perspective of Rachel's own life: in Rachel's days, tuberculosis was a disease without a cure or treatment. There was no one to care for children who had fallen ill with tuberculosis, because no one wanted to get close to them. Rachel was the only one who was willing to go and provide them with dedicated care, and she did so until she herself contracted the disease. When she returned from taking care of the children to her friends in Degania, they shunned her because of her illness.
The very people who led the establishment of the State of Israel, the people who built the State of Israel from the ground up, were unwilling to accept Rachel because of her illness. Thus, when Rachel describes an attitude that is unwilling to accept good tidings, no matter how great, if it comes from the mouth of a metzora – she speaks from the pain of her own experience.
The Tzara'at-stricken Messiah
Likewise, Chazal grappled with the question of how to relate to a message delivered by a metzora. The Gemara in Sanhedrin 98a relates that the Messiah sits at the gates of Rome among the metzora'im, and the difference between him and them is that he removes one bandage and replaces it, a second bandage and replaces it, rather than removing them all at once, so that if he is needed he will not be delayed. On the next page, Ulla, Rabba, and Rabbi Yochanan say that they do not want to see the Messiah when he comes. Rav Yosef, on the other hand, says that he will do anything just to sit in the shade of the dung of the Messiah's donkey.
These words were said about the Messiah, and to a certain extent they apply also to the establishment of the State of Israel. The founders of the State of Israel were for the most part not exactly great Torah scholars, and this was one of the things that aroused so much opposition to them in the Orthodox community. But if there is one thing to learn from Geichazi, it is that a person must participate with the general public in times of trouble, both physical trouble and spiritual trouble; one must recognize the trouble that the public is in and participate in it with them.
Edited by Yair Lichtman
[1] In days long past, the terrible enemy
Laid siege around Samaria;
Four lepers brought her the tidings.
As Samaria was besieged — so is the whole land now,
And the hunger is too heavy to bear;
But I will not accept a message of deliverance
If it comes from the mouth of a leper.
Let the pure one bring the tidings, let the pure redeem;
And if his hand cannot find the power to redeem —
Then I choose to fall in the anguish of the siege,
A light before the great day of tidings.
No comments:
Post a Comment