Parashat Sazria

There are few parashiot as terrifying as Tazria and Metzorah. The pasukim demand that we picture ourselves in an ancient time, when Hashem’s presence could be felt, and even the most physical elements of this world – skin clothes and houses – could indicate one’s spiritual standing. The parasha seems to take place in an environment totally removed from our physical world. Judgment is not measured with oxen or fields, nor is justice served with a whip or sword. Even our standard parasha about Tumah and Tahara will center about carcasses or dead bodies, but we have no way to relate to the Nega. Whether Baheres or Se’ais, or a Sopachas of Baheres or a Sopachas of Se’ais (see Mishnayos Nega’im, 1:1), modern times has left us no sufficient model of the Biblical disease. What can we possibly glean from these pasukim – this parasha and a half of seemingly the same details over and over – in a time when we can’t even sufficiently imagine the subject matter?

Perhaps what makes Parashat Nega’im so challenging isn’t even the overwhelming deluge of antiquated law, for we could still associate the physical blemish with spiritual impropriety, instead of with ritual impurity. But to view the Nega as the physical embodiment of Tumah, like one views a carcass, one would never expect to find a law that a man covered head to toe with Tzara’as is pure (13:13)! Clearly the person and not the Nega is what’s impure (see 13:3 Rashi D”H ViTimei Oso), not that this helps us understand the Torah’s ruling here; it still seems to be the epitomic Gezeiras HaKasuv, the law that defies all logic and reasoning.

Though the logic of this law, the head-to-toe Tzara’as, seems hopelessly broken, we should not neglect to note that the pasuk’s placement is equally baffling. The description of regular Nega’im developing on healthy skin spans two separate pesuchos in our parasha. The first deals with the symptom of Pisyon, spreading, while the second relates the laws of the symptom Michyah, healthy flesh in the center of the Nega. Here’s some quick background: in order for the Nega to be Tamei, it has to be white and either 1) turn two hairs white, 2) spread after first being examined by the Kohein, or 3) have a Michyah. One would expect to find the law of head-to-toe Tzara’as in the section about Pisyon, yet it appears within the context of the Michyah. Very strange.

This leads us to wonder why, of all the parashiot in Tazria, healthy skin should be given two separate pesuchot altogether. Burns and boils share one, and Nesek Bohak Karachas and Gabachas share one with all of Tzara’as Begadim (each type listed above at least gets its own stumah, except Karachas and Gabachas). Surely there must be something truly unique about each paragraph, some reason why the rest of the parasha categorizes by blemish but these two paragraphs categorize by symptom, but what? Let’s first analyze how these two paragraphs are different, and once we recognize their differences, perhaps we will be able to identify the unique nature of each symptom’s tale. Maybe then we’ll understand a little more about this head-to-toe Tzara’as and what reasoning may warrant its baffling laws.

1) Starting from the beginning, each paragraph opens with the development of a Nega, but in the first paragraph, henceforth called Pisyon, we read “Adam Ki Yiheeyeh ViOr Bissaro… ViHaya ViOr Bissaro LiNega Tzara’as,” while the second paragraph, Michyah, reads “Nega Tzara’as Ki Siheeyeh BiAdam.”

2) In Pisyon, the Nega is then “Huva El Aharon HaKohein O’ El Achad MiBanav HaKohanim,” but in Michyah, it is only “Huva El HaKohein.”

3) In Pisyon, we entertain the possibility that the Nega does or doesn’t have hair in it (pasukim 3 and 4, respectively). But in Michyah, we only mention the case where the Nega has hair and is Tamei, not the scenario where it doesn’t have hair and is Tahor.

4) In Pisyon, we regard the Nega as Baheres (13:4), the brightest of all four shades of white (again, see Mishnayos Negayim 1:1). But in Michyah, the Nega is exclusively called Se’ais (13:10), the weakest shade, though Rashi comments that a Michyah could halachically affect any shade of white, even Baheres.

5) Each paragraph refers to “Nega Tzara’as” in at least one place (13:2, 3, and 9). Rashi notes in pasuk 9 that the term Negah is lashon zachar (this is clear from pasukim 5, 6,and 17) while Tzara’as is lashon nikeivah (see pasukim 12 and 13). But in pasuk 3, the term Negah Tzara’as is lashon zachar (Hu), while in pasuk 9, the term is nikeivah (Ki Siheeyeh).

While we’re on the topic of lashon zachar and nikeivah, let’s analyze a few more pasukim and try to figure out what lashonos the rest of our parasha’s terms are. Adam, it goes without saying, is zachar. Se’ais and Baheres are both lashon nikeivah; Se’ais is proven from pasuk 10, Baheres is clear from pasuk 4. Sopachas seems the same as Mispachas, which is clearly nikeivah based on pasuk 7, and the gemara in Shavuos 6b indeed writes about it in lashon nikeivah. Additionally, Basar is zachar (see pasuk 15), as is Sei’ar (see pasuk 3). Now that we have all these rules straight, the flip-flopping uses of lashonos zachar and nikeivah behind each and every pasuk can be understood.

Well, every pasuk but the first one, which says “Adam Ki Yiheeyeh ViOr Bissaro Se’ais O’ Sopachas…” What does Yiheeyeh refer to? It can’t belong to “ViOr Bissaro” otherwise the pasuk would leave out the Bais prefix. Technically, one could try to apply it to the term Adam, the only other lashon zachar term in the pasuk, but that would sound weird; the same would be true for the continuation of the pasuk, which reads, “ViHaya ViOr Vissaro LiNega Tzara’as.” What sense then can we make of this pasuk’s structure?

Looking back, pasuk 2 is the introduction to Pisyon, and it seems to directly contrast the phrase “Nega Tzara’as Ki Siheeyeh BiAdam” in pasuk 9, the introduction to Michyah. Pasuk 9 seems to describe a spot of Tzara’as, thus explaining why the pasuk describes it in lashon nikeivah, though a Kohein has not yet inspected it. In Pisyon, however, the pasuk says Nega Tzara’as Hu, the Nega is Tzara’as, only after the Kohein inspects it. So Michyah is highlighted by our certainty that the spot is Tzara’as. In contrast, Pisyon seems to be highlighted by our skepticism.

In essence, there are two types of people who are brought to the Kohein to get checked for Nega’im: the paranoid person who is always certain that every little mark on his body is a Nega, and the smug person who lives in denial of his problems. The smug person is dragged to the Kohein by his caring friends, hence that lashon of ViHuva, he is brought. Keep in mind that only a Kohein may pronounce Tzara’as Tamei or Tahor. Even if he doesn’t know the Dinim, a non-Kohein expert can instruct him regarding what to declare, so technically even non-Kohanim could check Nega’im if they know what to look for. Quite possibly, some of the best Nega inspectors were not even Kohanim. The paranoid person isn’t looking for Mussar from the Kohein (the Sifra talks about how before the Kohein would even check the Nega, he would first reprimand the patient for even thinking that he could have Tzara’as, such thoughts suggest that a person suspects himself guilty of terrible sins like Lashon Hara or Geiva, and a guilty conscience can be very telling sometimes); rather, he’s looking for the most accurate psak. He too is dragged to the Kohein, but by the non-Kohein expert, not his friends.

The paragraph about Pisyon details the story of the paranoid patient, a man dragged “LiAharon HaKohein O’ El Achad MiBanav HaKohanim,” which happens to be the phrase from which we learn out the law that only a Kohein and not an expert can pronounce Tumah and Tahara (see Sifsei Chachamim). The prospect of Tumas Tzara’as is made up in his mind – either through total fabrication or due to guilty conscience – hence the lashon zachar “Ki Yiheeyeh” and “ViHaya,” when the man thinks he has Tzara’as and brings it to the expert, he shall be brought [by the expert] to Aharon or one of his sons. We suspect the man is needlessly paranoid, but can’t rule out the chance that he may have Tzara’as until after inspecting him; therefore, the pasuk writes upon discovery, “Nega Tzara’as Hu.” In contrast, the paragraph of Michyah relates the story of a man in denial; everyone sees Nega’im spreading all over his body, so they drag him directly to the Kohein for his own good so he can begin his spiritual rehabilitation, hence the simple lashon ViHuva El HaKohein. Because of the certainty of his ailment, the pasukim don’t bother entertaining the chance that his Nega is not bright enough or that it doesn’t turn hairs white.

We can now return to our original conjecture that the spiritual ailment a person suffers could be reflected through his physical condition. Pisyon is the perfect physical embodiment of paranoia! The Nega spreads and spreads until it seizes practically his entire body. The Michya, the healthy skin, is the perfect physical embodiment of denial! In fact, the pasuk says “Tzara’as Noshenes Hee,” the Michyah is actually healthy skin with Tzara’as underneath, in hiding. Because the Tzra’as is healing from the inside out, we determine that it’s not really healing at all, and the Michyah, the physical reflection of the patient’s denial, becomes the incriminating sign. When the Kohein pronounces him Tamei, the pasuk adds two extra words. “Lo Yasgirenu,” do not keep him quarantined, do not let him remain in hiding or in denial, for it is surely Tzara’as underneath the façade, just as he is surely Tamei.

It therefore follows that a person who suffers from a Michyah is pronounced Tamei both because of his misdeeds and his denial. Therefore, when the Tzara’as spreads across his entire body, it no longer reflects his denial; rather, it reflects quite the opposite. Therefore, once he overcomes the denial of his problem, the Tzara’as reflects his new attitude, spreads across his body, and he is pronounced Tahor. Then he gets started on fixing the actual misdeed, the process of ridding the Nega from his body altogether. He reenters a state of Tumah, but slowly fights it off until he is Tahor again.

The symptom of the changing hair, it seems to me, is not on either end of the spectrum of people treated for Tzara’as. For people who are affected by their Nega, people who come to the realization that they are being punished for their sins and resolve to come clean, their spiritual affliction is best represented by the Nega on their skin affecting them physically, and the simplest possible change is just for the nearby hairs to turn white as well. Some of these people are more certain of their mistakes than others, some are more like the patient in denial (in which case the Nega will first spread throughout the body; for further iyun, compare Rabbi Yehoshua’s opinion in Mishnayos Nega’im 8:2 and 3) and some are more like the paranoid patient.

It’s very interesting how we can read these two paragraphs as the categorization of four different types of people, highlighted by two extremes and also mentioning two in between. It’s especially interesting when we consider that this is exactly the same as the categorization of the four different shades of Neg’aim, two extremes and two in between. The extreme of Beheres is the physical embodiment of paranoia, where the Nega spreads for all to see and is as bright as pure snow; now we see exactly why the paragraph of Pisyon exclusively mentions Behares in pasuk 4. Likewise, the paragraph of Michyah concerns itself with a patient who tries to conceal the Nega, so pasuk 10 naturally refers to the Tzara’as as Si’eis! So for the in between conditions, we would expect a medium shade; therefore, the pasukim regarding white hairs mention the generic term Lavan!

When we dig beneath the surface of just these first two paragraphs, we come to realize that there is so much more to spiritual affliction than good deed and bad deed. It is not even the deeds of the person that is reflected by his physical appearance, but rather his psyche, the mentality with which he approaches his dilemma. We come to see how this is no antiquated lesson, that even today, though we don’t categorize our attitudes of paranoia or denial through white blotches on our skin, we recognize our attitude towards even everyday circumstances to have an incredible effect on our success or failure. The lessons of Tazria and Metzorah truly are demanding and a challenge to fully take to heart in our modern times, but in many ways, these lessons are more real than even oxen or whips. One might even suggest that these lessons are the very foundation of our personal makeup…

Rabbi Simlaei said: Just as the creation of Man came after the creation of animals, beasts, and birds, so too his Torah is explained after the Torah of the animals, beasts, and birds.
VaYikra, Rashi 12:2