Parashat Metzorah

Many wonder why the laws of Tzara’as on the house appear in a totally separate parasha from the rest of Hilchos Nega’im. Obviously, there is something that makes Nega’ei Batim very different from any other form of Tzara’as. However, the Midrash Tanchuma explains that when Klal Yisrael would sin, Hashem would restrain Himself from immediately expelling them from Eretz Yisrael, opting to first send a call for Teshuva. He would inflict their houses with Negai’m. If they would do Teshuva, good; but if not, He would inflict their clothing. Then He would send Karachas and Gabachas, then Nesakim, then Shchin, and finally Se’ais Sopachas and Baheres. If none of these would convince Klal Yisrael to do Teshuva, He would then kick them out. It seems clear from the Midrash that there is a very close correlation between Niga’ei Batim and other Nega’im, so what reason do we have to consider the house’s Tzara’as so different?

Here’s one difference: Regarding the process of declaring Nega’ei Batim, the pasuk says “U’Va Asher Lo HaBayis ViHigid LaKohein, KiNega Nirah Li BaBayis.” Until now, by the Tzara’as of the body and clothing, the person would bring the Nega to the Kohein without a declaration; he never had to say anything. But all of a sudden, the Torah gets very particular about the exact phrasing this man should use when addressing the Kohein.

More to the point, the pasuk insists that the man not pronounce the spot on his walls an actual Nega; rather, he should say it looks like a Nega and leave it to the Kohein to decide for sure, no matter how certain he is. Rashi comments, even if the man is a Talmid Chacham and he knows for sure, he shouldn’t paskin with words of certainty. The Mifarshim are very bothered by this comment. We all know that Nega’im are only Tamei once the Kohein pronounces them Tamei, and even the greatest Talmid Chacham hasn’t the ability to execute psak on his own. Why then should the Torah care at all what the Talmid Cacham, or any other individual for that matter, says about the Nega?! The Mizrachi explains that Rashi didn’t intend us to think the Chacham could paskin the case on his own; rather, Rashi meant that it’s not proper Derech Eretz for the Chacham to talk with such certainty; it would be arrogant of him to declare a ruling if he is not in position to execute that ruling himself.

However, there is a severe problem with our understanding of the Mizrachi’s explanation. Rashi seems so concerned for the words that the homeowner uses regarding the Nega, yet the Kohein himself, before he even goes to visit the house, tells the homeowner to clean out all of his possessions so they do not become Tamei. Shouldn’t the Kohein first take a look at the house, and then tell the man to clean it out immediately before declaring “Tamei Hu?” Yet he instead says right away, “go clean out your house, I’m sure it’s a Nega.” What happened to stressing “KiNega Nirah Li BaBayis?!”

There seems to be a much more significant difference in the way the Torah goes about describing Nega’ei Batim: Until now, the Torah spent a great deal of time discussing the process behind declaring Nega’im to be Tamei. What if it’s not deep enough, what if it has two hairs, what if it it’s not bright enough, et cetera. When it comes to Nega’ei Batim, however, there is only one pasuk that deals with symptoms, and that pasuk is out of order! The pasuk describes the walls’ symptoms as “Skika’aruruot Yirakrakot O’ Adamdamot U’Mareihen Shafal Min HaKir.” Rashi explains Skika’arurot to mean “sunken,” prompting the Malbim to ask why the pasuk has to repeat this idea of sunkenness when it says “U’Mareihen Shafal Min HaKir.” The Malbim answers that the first term refers to a physical sunkenness into the thickness of the wall while the second is a visual lowness, like the appearance of sunlight against shade. One would then expect to the Kohein to check for physical sunkenness by peeling away at the wall and seeing what is underneath, but the Kohein would never bother checking for Shikuah first. What if the surfaces’ color is not Shafal? The pasuk must be out of order; amazingly, it avoids the description of process. It treats the symptoms of the Nega as a given, not a possibility. Why then do we stress the need to say “KiNega” by the house’s Tzara’as; it seems like the least plausible place for the patient to stress his uncertainty and humility!

But we are still avoiding the most apparent contrast: When the Kohein is confronted with any form of Tzara’as in Parashat Sazria, he first quarantines the object until he decides it is Tamei, and then he either destroys it or exiles him. Immediately. When the Kohein is confronted with Nega’ei Batim, however, the house is declared Tamei the moment it is quarantined. The next two to three weeks are to see whether the Tumah will disappear. The Tamei house is never destroyed immediately or even after one week, no matter how severe the affliction is. In short, we could propose that the Kohein’s role in Parashat Sazria is to search for Tumah while the Kohein’s role in Metzorah is to search for Tahara. This explains why Nega’ei Batim is paired with Tahara process of a Metzorah instead of with Nega’ei Begadim or Baheres.

Which leads us to the most startling contrast between Nega’ei Batim and all other forms: The pasuk says “ViYatza HaKohein Min HaBayis El Pesach HaBayis, ViHisgir Es HaBayis Shivas Yamim,” the Kohein first leaves the house and then declares it Tamei. The reason for this is relatively obvious. If the Kohein declares it Tamei while he’s standing inside, he would become Tamei as well; it makes sense for the Kohein to just stand outside and avoid the Tumah. We see that the general case of Tzara’as HaBayis is that the Nega grows on the inside of the house, not the façade. This point is restated in pasuk 41, which commands the house to be patched “MiBayis Saviv,” all around on the inside. Therefore, when the Kohein comes back seven days later to inspect the Nega, he has no choice but to enter the house and become Tamei (or at least risk becoming Tamei, for he must remain inside Kidei Achilas Pras to become Tamei. Unlikely though that he could scrape away the plaster and sufficiently check both the Nega’s surface and underneath in such a short time span). By other forms of Tzara’as, the Kohein never seems to risk Tumah. Even when the Kohein becomes Tamei by Parah Adumah, it serves a productive purpose. Here, there’s always the potential that the Kohein will become Tamei for no reason; he will visit to try and be Mitaheir the house only to discover the futility of his visit.

Perhaps this is why the Mishna in Nega’im (13:1) says a house that is cured from Tzara’as in one week requires no Korban, but a house whose Nega remains for one week, then is quarantined for a second week, and then disappears, does require a Korban. If the Kohein returns to a Tahor house after one week, his visit is not only beneficial, but he doesn’t become Tamei upon entry into the house. But if the Nega lasts two weeks, the Kohein does become Tamei when he enters to inspect after the first week, and to atone for causing this Kohein to needlessly be Mitamei himself, the homeowner must bring a Korban.

Nega’ei Batim really forces us consider the relationship between the Kohein and his patient. The Kohein doesn’t just show up and declare the house Tahor or Tamei, he doesn’t just determine whether his patient has done sufficient Teshuva. Instead, he inspires and motivates his patient to come clean, he expresses his confidence that the homeowner has done Teshuva and there will be no negative consequences to his entry into the house and inspection of the Nega. In effect, the patient feels he owes it to the Kohein to do Teshuva. If someone could have so much faith in him, the least he could do is try and repent. And if the Kohein ever emerges as a Rishon LiTumah with bad news, it deeply disappoints the patient; and if he ever does eventually do Teshuva, he brings a Korban to express how truly sorry he is for taking a week or two too long to fix his ways.

Of course the Kohein has to eventually give up on this individual. Rashi notes that even if the Nega doesn’t spread either of the first two weeks, the Kohein still orders the wall to be breached and patched. At this point, the Kohein does everything in his power to avoid a Chazaka of futile attempts at curing both the house and its owner; he therefore takes forceful action and gets rid of the Nega himself. And if it returns the next week, the Kohein’s endeavor is considered totally futile, the house is demolished, and the Kohein stops risking his state of Tahara for this man’s sake. The next time the patient gets Tzara’as, it will be on his clothing. The Kohein will say, “I’m no longer here to inspire you to do Teshuva; I’m only here to declare that you still haven’t atoned and then burn your possessions. I tried my best to help, but now it’s up to you to repent.”

By now, it should be obvious why the pasuk so forcefully discourages the patient from calling the spot on his house a Nega; the relationship this man is supposed to build with the Kohein is one where he bears concern for the Kohein’s Tahara, he hopes to never place the Kohein in a position susceptible to the contraction of Tumah. Even if the man is a Talmid Chacham, it would be the greatest Chutzpa in the world to call over a Kohein and insist that he enter to inspect a Nega! Instead, the person must humbly implore, “I hope this doesn’t inconvenience you, but I might have something that’s like a Nega on my house’s walls. I’m sure it’s nothing, but could you take a look at it for me?” The Kohein, too, plays his part right off the Torah’s script. He replies, “I don’t mind at all if it’s a Nega because I’m so certain you’ll do Teshuva if it is. In fact, I’m so excited to help you through this difficult time that I want you to clean your house out before I even arrive, just to prove to you how little I mind the potential inconvenience.” And thus is the patient inspired through positive reinforcement and positive attitude.

Ultimately, we come to recognize through this most peculiar dialogue the incredible relationship established between the Kohein and his patient. Like the pasuk says, “LiHoros BiYom HaTamei U’BiYom HaTahor, Zos Toras HaTzara’as.” These laws of Tzara’as are not the Kohein’s to merely declare; they are his tools to teach by example, and if the Kohein succeeds at inspecting houses, then he succeeds at keeping Bnei Yisrael out of Galus.

Good Shabbos.