We must endeavor to understand the rationale behind the metzora’s unusual punishment. Why is the Torah so demanding in its insistence that he be excommunicated from the community– punished in a harsher manner than any other individual who has become tameh, spiritually unclean ? Indeed, he may not be in the presence of any other person who is also tameh. The requirement to wear torn clothes and cry out tameh, tameh, also seems to be out of character with other tema’im. The Baalei Mussar explain this issue with a study in human behavior. The metzora is a “motzi ra,” he…
Back to Home -> Tazria ->
The Commentators have offered many explanations in order to rationalize this perplexing halacha. Indeed, if the white plague area covers as much as ninety-nine percent of the body, the individual is deemed tameh, contaminated. The moment the affliction reaches its climax of one hundred percent coverage of the body, the person becomes tahor, clean. One would venture to say that this law is simply inconsistent with reality. Does one become tahor as soon as he is completely tameh ? Horav Shimon Schwab, z.l., cites the Talmud’s exposition on this pasuk and offers a profound explanation. In Sanhedrin 97a Chazal comment…
The negaim plagues mentioned in the Torah that strike man, his garments, or his home are not physical, communicable diseases. We note that spiritual affliction affects only Jews and not gentiles. Before the giving of the Torah, negaim, plagues, did not cause tumah. They are singular punishments for the sin of lashon hara, slander etc. The public castigation which the metzora must undergo seems to be inconsistent with the Torah’s desire to maintain a sense of discretion regarding a Jew’s iniquities. We find that the Torah creates discreet opportunities for the sinner to return from war, so that the real…
The kohen is the only one who is able to render decisions regarding the purity or impurity of negaim, physical afflictions. Indeed, Chazal teach us that in the event that the kohen is not versed in the laws of negaim — or can not distinguish between the various types of plagues — a Torah scholar should be summoned. After the scholar considers the situation, he is obligated to relate his decision to the kohen, who, in turn, pronounces the individual tameh or tahor. The kohen must be the one to articulate the judgment. Describing this uneducated kohen, Chazal use the…
It seems strange for a bird to have a name which is connected with chesed, kindness. The Talmud in Chullin 63a remarks on the bird’s name and states that, indeed, it is a bird which demonstrates kindness towards members of its own species. One may wonder why the Torah saw fit to prohibit such a “compassionate” bird from human consumption. After all, if we are what we eat, is compassion not a character trait everyone should seek to possess ? There are a number of answers to this question. Probably the most notable is one attributed to the Imrei Emes. …
This halacha similarly applies to any intoxicating drink which the kohen imbibes. The punishment of death is incurred, however, only in the event the kohen drinks an intoxicating quantity, which Chazal have determined is even a reviis of undiluted wine. There is obviously no question of the kohen actually being drunk, since this small amount would not cause intoxication. There is, however, a fear that his mind will not be totally clear and tranquil. To transmit Hashem’s charge, one’s mind must be sharp, his intelligence, clear. Only then can he maintain the proper focus in order to guide and inspire…
Rashi cites Moshe’s dialogue with Aharon immediately following Nadav and Avihu’s deaths. “I knew the Mishkan would be sanctified in those whom Hashem’s glory reposes,” Moshe said to Aharon, “but I thought it would be either one of us. Now I know that they were greater than either one of us.” Indeed, Chazal view Nadav and Avihu, who met their deaths in such a tragic manner, as being great tzaddikim. In the machzor for Yom Kippur, it is stated that one who sheds tears over the deaths of the two sons of Aharon will not see the premature demise of…
Chazal cite a number of reasons for the terrible decree accorded to Nadav and Avihu. Undoubtedly, their sins are to be viewed as relative iniquities in accordance with the sublime level of kedushah, holiness, attained by Nadav and Avihu. One reason presented by Chazal is difficult to accept. They state that Nadav and Avihu walked behind Moshe and Aharon and remarked, “When will these two old men (Moshe and Aharon) die, so that we can assume the mantle of leadership ?” How do we reconcile ourselves to this statement ? Are we to believe that these two spiritual giants would…
The beginning of the parsha focuses on the events surrounding the eighth day of the Mishkan’s inauguration. This was the day Aharon Ha’Kohen and his sons were invested into the priestly service. During the days of the inauguration, the first family of kohanim offered sacrifices in anticipation of the Shechinah “descending” to repose in the Mishkan. Rashi notes that all of Klal Yisrael assembled to witness the consecration of this holy edifice to which they had all donated generously. Yet, despite their devotion and sacrificial offerings, the Shechinah did not descend. Moshe and Aharon entered the Mishkan to beg Hashem…
Rashi tells us that Aharon exemplified perfect obedience in that he did not deviate one iota from all he was told. The commandments were many and filled with much detail, but Aharon readily agreed to perform that which was expected of him. This statement is enigmatic! Are we to commend Aharon for doing his job ? Does this mean that every time one does what is expected of him his praises should be publicly acclaimed? The Maharal explains that Aharon accepted Hashem’s order as stated by Moshe as if it had come directly from Hashem. In fact, to acknowledge the…