---

The two Parashot read this week--Tazria and Metzora--are devoted primarily to the laws of Tzara’at. R’ Nosson Yehuda Leib (Leibel) Mintzberg z”l (1943-2018; rabbi and Rosh Yeshiva in Yerushalayim and Bet Shemesh, Israel) makes several observations about the order in which the various laws of Tzara’at are presented in our Parashot.

The Torah’s presentation begins with the laws of Tzara’at that afflicts a person, then the laws of Tzara’at that afflicts a person’s clothes, and finally the laws of Tzara’at that afflicts a person’s house. However, in between the laws relating to clothing and the laws relating to houses, the Torah discusses the purification process and sacrificial offerings of a Metzora (person with Tzara’at). Perhaps, R’ Mintzberg writes, this division is explained by the fact that the laws of Tzara’at on people and clothing applied even before Eretz Yisrael was conquered and settled, whereas the laws of Tzara’at on houses applied only afterwards.

He continues: Tzara’at on a person is described first because, although miraculous, it has a parallel in the natural world. In contrast, Tzara’at on clothing and houses does not parallel any natural occurrence, so it is listed later.

Also, Midrash Rabbah teaches that G-d, in His Mercy, strikes a person’s home before his clothing, and his clothing before his person--the reverse of the order in which the three types of Tzara’at appear in the Torah. However, in order to highlight that Tzara’at is a punishment, the three types are listed in the order that hits “closest to home”: first a person’s body, then his clothes, then his house. (Ben Melech Al Ha’Torah)

---

“On the eighth day, the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.” (12:3)

R’ Avraham Zvi Kluger shlita (Chassidic Mashpia in Bet Shemesh, Israel) asks: All other Mitzvot are not binding on a person until the person has attained a certain level of Da’at / intellectual maturity--in the case of a boy, at age thirteen. Why is the Mitzvah of Milah done at the young age of eight days, when the participant is not even aware he is performing a Mitzvah?

R’ Kluger answers: Every other Mitzvah is a way for a Jew to declare: “I have a relationship with Hashem.” A person needs some level of Da’at to make that declaration. The Mitzvah of Milah, in contrast, reflects the Brit / covenant between Hashem and the Jewish People; it expresses a Jew’s inherent holiness, and his relationship with Hashem that is not affected by his own choices or even his awareness.

In addition, R’ Kluger continues: When the Torah “waits” until a child has attained some level of Da’at before obligating him or her in a Mitzvah, the Torah is effectively stating that even if the child does not understand the Mitzvah now, he or she will attain some understanding of it someday. However, the concept of a Brit / covenant between the Creator and one of His creations is beyond any rational explanation; even if we waited a million years, we would never understand it. Hashem has His reasons, but from our perspective, it just is. Therefore, there is no reason to postpone the Brit Milah until the child has Da’at. (La’brit Habeit p.295-296)

---

“The Kohen shall look at it, and behold!--the affliction has changed to white, and the Kohen shall declare the affliction pure; it is pure.” (13:17)

Why didn’t the verse conclude simply: “The Kohen shall declare it pure”?

R’ Yisrael Ze’ev Halevi Horowitz z”l (1778-1861; rabbi of Sátoraljaújhely (“Uhel”), Hungary; later settled in Teveryah, Eretz Yisrael) explains: The verse is teaching that even after the Tzara’at affliction is technically gone and “the affliction is pure,” the aura of an “affliction” remains until the Metzora establishes guardrails to ensure that he does not repeat his sin; only then “It is pure.” (Lakachat Mussar)

---

“This shall be the law of the Metzora on the day of his purification--Ve’huva/ and he shall be brought to the Kohen.” (14:2)

Midrash Tanchuma comments: “Ve’huva” is a contraction of “Ve’hu-va”/ “And he is coming to the Kohen.”

What is the meaning of this Derashah / interpretation, which is unlike the literal translation of the verse? R’ Yissachar Shlomo Teichtal z”l Hy”d (1885-1945; rabbi and Rosh Yeshiva in Pieštany, Czechoslovakia) explains:

Kohanim have the trait of loving peace and pursuing peace (see Avot 1:12). In contrast, a person who speaks Lashon Ha’ra causes divisions between spouses, between friends, and within the community in general. That is why he is punished with Tzara’at and is required to quarantine outside of the community. Therefore, “on the day of his purification,” when he wants to repent and rejoin the community, he must “come to the Kohen,” i.e., he must adopt the attitude of the Kohen and become a person who loves peace and pursues it. (Mishneh Sachir)

---

Pirkei Avot

“Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai had five students . . . He told them: ‘Go out and discern which is the proper path to which a person should attach himself.’ . . . Rabbi Yehoshua replied, ‘A good friend.’ Rabbi Yose replied, ‘A good neighbor.’ . . .” (Ch.2)

R’ Yechezkel Sarna z”l (1890–1969; Rosh Yeshiva of the Chevron Yeshiva) asks: Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai’s students were pious and holy men! Why did they need good friends and good neighbors; could they not cling to G-d through meditating in seclusion upon His greatness?

We see, answers R’ Sarna, that having a good friend and a good neighbor is not merely an aid to strengthening oneself spiritually. Rather, it is an integral part of serving Hashem, and anyone who thinks he can navigate Torah study and Yir’at Hashem / reverence of G-d completely on his own is sadly mistaken. (Daliot Yechezkel II p.281)

---

Shabbat

“If you restrain your feet because of the Shabbat; refrain from accomplishing your own needs on My holy day; if you proclaim the Shabbat ‘Oneg’ / ‘A delight,’ the Holy One, Hashem, ‘Honored One,’ and you honor it by not engaging in your own ways, from seeking your needs or discussing the forbidden--then you shall be granted pleasure with Hashem . . .” (Yeshayah 58:13-14)

R’ Yaakov Kranz z”l (1741-1804; Dubno Maggid) explains these verse with a parable:

A well-off man had three sons--call them: Reuven, Shimon, and Levi. Reuven was extremely wealthy, while Shimon lived in abject poverty. Reuven and Shimon both lived in a town some distance from their father and their much younger brother, Levi.

When it came time for Levi to marry, the father wrote to his sons Reuven and Shimon, inviting them to the wedding. “All expenses you incur for my honor will be reimbursed,” he wrote.

Immediately, Reuven outfitted himself and his wife and children with new suits, shoes, and jewelry and loaded them all into his gilded carriage. Just as he was about to set out for the wedding, he sent for his brother, Shimon: “Quickly, bring your family and ride with me.” And, so, Reuven and Shimon arrived at their father’s home together--one in his new finery and the other in rags.

After several weeks at his father’s home, Reuven announced that it was time for him to return to his business, and he presented his father with a bill for the clothing and jewelry his family had worn to the wedding. His father, however, said, “What do you want from me?”

“You promised to reimburse me!” Reuven said, but his father denied it. Reuven then pulled out his father’s letter and argued, “You said right here that you would reimburse me!”

“Please read the letter carefully,” replied the father. “It says: ‘All expenses you incur for my honor will be reimbursed.’ Had you incurred all of those expenses for my honor, you would have outfitted your poor brother and his family as well. But you thought only of making a good impression yourself--for your honor, not mine.”

Similarly, says the Dubno Maggid, how can we test whether the delicacies we consume on Shabbat are a fulfilment of the Mitzvah of Oneg Shabbat or merely pursuits of personal pleasure? One indication is whether we share our Shabbat table with those in need.

The Gemara (Beitzah 15b) teaches that expenditures made for Shabbat do not count against a person’s annual income decreed on Rosh Hashanah. Rather, Hashem says, “Borrow on My account and I will repay you.” However, says the Dubno Maggid, one can count on that repayment only when his expenditures are in honor of Shabbat, which he demonstrates by including the needy at his meals, not when the expenditures are for his own gratification. As Mishlei (19:17) says, “One who is gracious to the poor has made a loan to Hashem, and He will pay him his reward.”

The Dubno Maggid adds: The above verses in Yeshayah provide another way of testing whether one is enjoying Shabbat for the sake of the Mitzvah or for his personal pleasure. If one is as careful in observing the Shabbat prohibitions listed in those verses--refraining from accomplishing one’s own needs on the holy day and honoring it by not engaging in one’s own ways and not seeking one’s needs or discussing the forbidden--as he is careful to enjoy delicacies, that is a sign that he is acting for the sake of the Mitzvah. (Ohel Yaakov: Behar)

Find Other Issues

Hama'ayan's archives are being rebuilt. Check back soon.