Our Parashah opens (Vayyikra 12:1-8):
“HaShem spoke to Moshe, saying Speak to the Children of Israel, saying: When a woman conceives and gives birth to a male, she shall be in a state of “tumah” for a seven day period as during her separation [as a niddah from both marital relations and entering the Mikdash or touching Kodshim or Terumah] shall she be in a state of “tumah”, and on the 8th day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. For 33 [additional] days she shall sit in the blood of her “taharah”; she may not touch anything sacred, and she may not enter the Mikdash until the completion of her days of “taharah”. If she gives birth to a girl, she shall be in a state of “tumah” for 2 weeks as during her separation [as a niddah from both marital relations and entering the Mikdash or touching Kodshim or Terumah] shall she be in a state of “tumah”, and for 66 days she shall remain in the blood of her 'taharah”. Upon the completion of the days of her “taharah” for a son or for a daughter, she shall bring a sheep within its first year for a Korban Olah, and a young dove or turtledove for a Korban Chatat to the Tent of Meeting to the Kohen [officiating at the Avodah]. He shall offer it before HaShem and atone for her, and she becomes “taharah” from the source of her blood; this is the law of one who gives birth to a male or a female. But if she cannot afford a sheep, then she shall take two turtledoves or two young doves, one for the Korban Olah and one for the Korban Chatat, and the Kohen shall provide atonement for her and she shall become “taharah.” (Note: “Tumah” and its affiliate words mean “limited or restricted in relating to HaShem, the Mikdash, Kodshim, and other Holy things or people,” and its strongest manifestation is in death. “Taharah” is exactly the reverse.)

When a woman gives birth, her state of purity goes through stages.

Stage One, the first week after giving birth to a son, or first two weeks after a daughter, restricts the Yoledet from marital relations, from entering the Mikdash, and from having any involvement with Terumah and Kodshim.

Stage Two, thirty-three days following the first week, begins on the 8th day following the birth of a son and the 15th day following the birth of a daughter, and during this time in Biblical law she is permitted to have relations with her husband, but maintains the restrictions regarding Terumah and Kodshim, even if she bleeds at any time during the period before bringing her Korbanot. (Note: Our contemporary practice is totally different regarding when marital relations become permissible, and we treat any bleeding as regular niddah bleeding.)

Stage Three, at the earliest, occurs 40 days after the birth of a son and 80 days after the birth of a daughter, consists in the regular purification rites for a severe “tumah,” and ends at nightfall.

Stage Four lasts from that nightfall until the bringing of a Korban Chatat followed by the bringing of a Korban Olah (de facto, at least bringing the Korban Chatat is required). The earliest time that this can occur is the following morning. Until the Korbanot are brought, the woman may eat Terumah and Maaser Sheni, but may not enter the Mikdash or involve herself with Kodshim. The conclusion of Stage Four occurs when the Officiating Kohen has successfully brought the Korbanot on her behalf, and she may then also enter the Mikdash and touch and eat Kodshim. These verses refer to the Kohen's action as “atoning” for her.

We can understand why she has restrictions of marital relations and “tumah,” since there is a blood flow as with a niddah. We can even understand the Korban Olah, as this symbolizes complete personal dedication to HaShem. But why does she bring a Korban Chatat; for what sin does she need “Kapparah,” atonement? Her only actions as described in our verses are conception, giving birth, returning to marital relations with her husband (specifically permitted in Biblical Law), and purifying herself at the conclusion of her period of “tumah.” Not only are none of these actions a Biblical sin, it is hard to imagine how anyone would even think that they could be.

We find four basic ways to address these issues from the Gemara and medieval sources. The first, stated by the Sages in the Gemara (Niddah 31b, Kritot 26a), says simply that there is no sin. While this answer is gratifying to our moral consciousness, it leaves unanswered the questions of why, then, must the Yoledet bring a Korban Chatat and for what is she making a “Kapparah.”

The second, one of two opinions attributed to Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai (ibid), looks at the wife of a Kohen as the prototype for all women. The Kohen’s wife is frequently obliged to handle and eat Kodshim, as well as to enter the Mikdash with her husband, thus these prohibitions are mentioned for the sake of her circumstances, and then apply to all women equally. The Korban Chatat, from this view, does not atone for a “Chet” (sin) but is part of a process of “Chitui” (dedication or initiation), as with the original dedication of the Mishkan.

The other opinion attributed to Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai finds the possibility of sin in the labor of childbirth. He suggests that a woman becomes so terrified by the pain of childbirth that she vows never to have relations with her husband again, a vow that she breaks fairly soon after giving birth. The first rather obvious problem with this approach is that nowhere in our text is there any hint of such a vow. The second is that a specific woman may in fact not have made such a vow, and therefore should be exempt from bringing the Korban Chatat, indeed prohibited from bringing one.

Nonetheless, this view of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai has been the most influential in Rabbinic literature, especially among Halakhic writers (who often assume that a woman made the vow but forgot that she had done so), with the Arukh HaShulchan going so far as to regard the mere possibility of such a vow, rather than its actuality, as binding on all women.

However, yet a fourth possibility exists if we follow a hint from the Tsror HaMor, which suggests that the Korban Chatat of the Yoledet is in place to atone for the sin of all womankind. When did “tumah” enter the world? When Chavah gave birth. What did that “tumah” represent? The distance between herself and HaShem, a distance which crippled her true greatness as “Mother of All Living.” How does that distance get repaired? Inch by inch by women in their roles as wives and mothers. Why does she bring both a Korban Chatat and a Korban Olah? To wipe away any past impediments in the relationship between herself and HaShem, thereby initiating either a new relationship or least new dimensions of a prior one (Korban Chatat as both “Chitui” for herself and overcoming “Chet” for Chavah), and then rededicating herself totally to HaShem (Korban Olah).

Therefore, first marital relations are restored, reestablishing both her capacity for intimacy and the possibility of becoming a source of life. This is followed by a long period of distance from HaShem and the Mikdash, allowing for deep reflection and transformation. The basic periods are for the son, and are doubled for a daughter, who can herself become a source of life. Then closeness to HaShem (Terumah and Maaser Sheni as signs of that) returns, followed by the Korbanot and full intimacy with the Divine Presence and its special location.

Yet, we must still understand the need for the Kohen to offer her “Kapparah,” atonement. We instinctively think of Kapparah as forgiveness of sins, and Yom HaKippurim as the occasion par excellence of such forgiveness. But at the time of the Mikdash, Yom HaKippurim also was the day on which a full return to freedom occurred for a Jewish slave, as well as the redistribution of ancestral estates during the Yovel. In short, we have the Kapparah of sins being forgiven, and the Kapparah of our freedom for both ourselves and our relationship with HaShem.

The Kohen brings all of these dimensions of Kapparah to the new mother. Forgiveness for personal sin, if there was one. Forgiveness for Chavah, and an aliyah for her neshamah. And lastly, the renewal of the new mother's unique freedom and creativity, in partnership with HaShem, to be the Mother and Guide of that which lives.

Shabbat Shalom

THE WEEKLY SIDRA- TAZRIYA- METZORA
Rabbi Moshe Greebel

If there were ever two factors that were responsible for the non-observance of Mitzvos of the Torah, they would invariably be pseudo scholarly assumptions, and a desire to be as the other nations.

How many times have we heard the opinions of those more vocal ‘scholars,’ who maintain that the Mitzvos in the Torah are based solely on human logic and reason? Inaccurately, they claim the only reason the Torah forbids the consumption of swine, is that it can cause trichinosis. Or, only because shellfish allergy can cause mild symptoms, such as hives or nasal congestion, or more severe and even life threatening symptoms, did the Torah forbid it. The proponents of such ‘scholarship’ assume that their knowledge is on the same par as that of the Torah- a very serious error in their comprehension.

On the other hand, historically, there has always been a Hellenized philosophy held by many, which sought equality with the other nations of the world. Even though Jewish children are almost without exception given a name in LaShon HaKodesh, somewhere along the line, they were referred to by their German, Slavic, and Anglicized names- as the other nations of the world. And, while the other nations have the option to choose from several interpretations of Christianity, so too do Jews have the option to choose from several forms of what is termed ‘Judaism’- another error in judgment so severe, that it has cut off countless Jewish souls from their true inheritance of Torah. But, consider the following Midrash Vayikra Rabbah 19-2, which refers to this week’s double Sidros:

“Rav Alexandri Ben Chagai and Rav Alexandri the Krovaitz (hymnologist) said, ‘If all the nations of the world should gather together to make white one wing of a raven, they would not be able to accomplish it; even so, should all the nations of the world gather together to uproot one word of the Torah, they would be powerless to accomplish it.’”

Now, this Midrash certainly requires some explanation, which fortunately, comes to us in the text K’hilas Yitzchak, in the name of Rav Zvi Hirsch Chajes of Vilna (1805- 1855), of blessed memory. To begin with, Rav Zvi Hirsch cites the M’chilta (chapter 6), on the following Passuk (verse) in the Sidra of Bo, which deals with the smearing of the blood of the Korban Pesach (offering) onto the houses of the B’nai Yisroel in Egypt:

“And they shall take of the blood, and strike it on the two side posts and on the upper door post of the houses, in which they shall eat it.” (Sh’mos 12:7)

The M’chilta learns:

“’On the two side posts and on the upper door post of the houses…..’ On the inside (of the house). Do you say on the inside? Or perhaps, on the outside? The Torah teaches, ‘And when I (referring to HaShem) see the blood’ (ibid. 12:13). That which is seen by Me, but not seen by others. These are the words of Rabbi Shimon…..”

Momentarily interrupting the M’chilta, we see that the sign of smeared blood was a sign only for HaShem, to spare that house from Makkas B’chorim (plague of the death of the first born). Not being a sign for others, the blood must have been smeared on the inside of the houses. We return to the M’chilta:

“…..Rabbi Nassan says, ‘It was on the inside.’ Do you say on the inside? Or perhaps, on the outside? The Torah teaches, ‘And the blood shall be to you for a sign upon the houses’ (ibid. 12:13). It is a sign for you (the B’nai Yisroel), but not a sign for others.”

Since the smeared blood was not a sign for others, once again the blood must have been smeared on the inside.

Now, we have two Tannayim, Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Nassan, who fully agreed that the blood of the Korban Pesach was smeared on the inside. Yet, each one learned this fact from different parts of the same Passuk. What exactly, was their disputation? Rav Zvi Hirsch responded in the following manner.

It is well known, that the entire purpose of Y’tziyas Mitzrayim (the Exodus from Egypt) was for the sake of the acceptance of the Torah and the Mitzvos. This is as HaShem stated when He first made Himself known to Moshe:

“…..And this shall be a sign to you, that I have sent you; When you have brought forth the people out of Egypt, you shall serve G-d upon this mountain.” (Sh’mos 3:12)

That is, the acceptance of the Torah and its Mitzvos by the B’nai Yisroel, occurred on Har (Mount) Sinai.

Now, continued Rav Zvi Hirsch, HaShem with His infinite wisdom to observe all future generations, saw that in the latter years after Matan Torah (giving of the Torah), there would arise those ‘scholars’ who would have the audacity to provide their own reasoning to the Mitzvos of the Torah. Those Mitzvos which appealed to their sense of rational and logic, they kept. Yet, those which did not, they did not keep.

That is the explanation of the first Tannah of the M’chilta, Rabbi Shimon, who cited ‘And when I see the blood.’ Only HaShem can see the reasoning behind the Mitzvos, no human being can see that. Our obligation is not to try to see the hidden purposes for commanding us these principles, but rather, to accomplish all the Mitzvos, without exception. This can be seen from the Gemarah in Sanhedrin 38a:

“Our Rabbis taught that Adam was created (last of all beings) on Erev Shabbos. And why? Lest the Sadducees say, ‘The Holy One, Blessed Be He, had a partner (viz., Adam) in His work of creation.’”

The Sadducees, who gave credit only to the Torah Sh’Bichsav (written Torah), and not to the Torah Sh’Ba’al Peh (oral Torah of the Rabbanim) in the time of the second Bais HaMikdash, were heretics, who argued feverishly with our Rabbanim. Had Adam been created on the first Sunday, these Sadducees would have claimed him to have been a partner with HaShem in the wisdom of creation and Torah Mitzvos. Adam however, was created on Friday, quite a few days after the commencement of creation, which proves that HaShem has no partner who also has the wisdom of creation and Torah Mitzvos. This is the point that Rabbi Shimon makes.

Continuing with the second Tannah, Rabbi Nassan, Rav Zvi Hirsch taught the following. It was also known to HaShem, that future exiles would take place for the B’nai Yisroel- Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Rome. This is as HaShem stated to Moshe:

“And HaShem said to Moshe, ‘I am that I am…..’” (Sh’mos 3:14)

On this Passuk, Rashi cites the Gemarah in B’rachos 9b, and the Sh’mos Rabbah 3-6:

“The Holy One, blessed be He said to Moshe, ‘Go and say to Yisroel that I was with you in this servitude (in Egypt), and I shall be with you in the servitude of the (other) kingdoms.’”

Now, explained Rav Zvi Hirsch, the greatest danger of any exile of Jews, is the desire to be as those non Jews around them, and to emulate them. Whatever their non Jewish neighbors deem fit, so do exiled Jews. Whatever is not deemed fit by their non Jewish neighbors, is not acceptable to exiled Jews.

That is why the Torah states, ‘And the blood shall be to you for a sign.’ We are instructed not to look to our non Jewish neighbors to determine for us what is acceptable, and what is not. We have our own exclusive sign to follow- the sign of Torah and Mitzvos. And, that is the point made by Rabbi Nassan.

Basically then, Rabbi Shimon was very concerned about future generations who would make their pseudo scholarly false assumptions on the Torah (as if they were partners in the act of creation). Rabbi Nassan however, was concerned for future exiles, wherein Jews would emulate their host countries. And, this is the difference in their disputation.

Only one thing remains- the meaning of our original Vayikra Rabbah of ‘ If all the nations of the world should gather together to make white one wing of a raven.’ In answer to this query, Rav Zvi Hirsch concluded in the following manner.

The blackness of the raven can be considered an ugly thing (for a bird). Yet, if every human being took it upon himself to transform just one wing of a raven from black to a prettier shade of white, they would be unsuccessful. So too, if the other nations of the world attempted to uproot even one word of the Torah, to have all exiled Jews not fulfill that one word, they would fail as well. For, at all times will there be Jews who stubbornly cling to the entire Torah and its Mitzvos, without any exception.

And so, even though HaKadosh Baruch Hu foresaw the latter days from Matan Torah as being days of pseudo scholarly assumption, and emulation of our non Jewish neighbors, He did provide us with guaranteed assurances that no force in this world will ever be able to completely separate all Jews from their natural inheritance of Torah.

May we soon see the G’ulah Sh’laimah in its complete resplendency- and in our times.

Good Shabbos.

* * * * *

NCYI's Weekly Divrei Torah Bulletin is sponsored by
the Henry, Bertha and Edward Rothman Foundation -
Rochester, New York; Cleveland, Ohio; Circleville, Ohio

* * * * *

The National Council of Young Israel's Divrei Torah Bulletin is a weekly newsletter. If you'd like to receive our weekly e-newsletter with the Parshat Hashavua, Click here to sign up!