TTHE WEEKLY SIDRA- M’TZORA
Rabbi Moshe Greebel

The discussion of correctly defining the skin disease in the Torah known as Tzoras, has always been a lively enterprise, with opinions ranging from leprosy all the way to a chronic case of bad acne. Making matters even more interesting, from the text Mai’Ain Bais HaSho’Aiva by Rav Shimon Schwab (1908- 1993) of blessed memory, we will shortly discover that in truth, there are two separate forms of Tzoras, with one of them having no basis whatsoever in the science of medicine. 

Prior to beginning our discussion though, it must be understood that when it comes to the N’ga’im (Tzoras afflictions) of a house, clothing, or even the human body in the Torah, the appearance of such afflictions themselves do not render the victim Tamei (impure). Rather, what decides Tuma (impurity) in these cases, is the formal declaration of the Kohain. In this week’s Sidra, the Torah informs us that the specific skin affliction of Tzoras, is not a matter of science or medicine, but something that was sent by Shamayim (heaven) for any number of Aveiros (sins) that were committed against others. But, we will shortly return to this theme.

We begin with the following Passuk (verse) in this week’s Sidra, which speaks of a Tzarua (one afflicted with Tzoras), who has been healed of his malady: 
“And the Kohain shall go out of the camp; and the Kohain shall look, and, behold, if the disease of Tzoras is healed in the Tzarua.” (Vayikra 14:3)

If the Torah is normally very economic with it words, posed Rav Shimon, why did it not simply state, ‘And, behold, if the disease of Tzoras is healed’? What need was there for the Torah to add the seemingly superfluous expression ‘In the Tzarua’? In whom else would the Tzoras be healed?

Commencing with his response to this question, Rav Shimon let it be known that in truth, there are actually two forms of Tzoras. The first is found in the present world, and is referred to as leprosy (Rav Shimon’s actual word). From the very practical Internet, we also know leprosy as Hansen’s Disease. It is transferable to others through what most experts in the field believe to be perspiration. Left medically untreated, leprosy can be progressive, causing permanent damage to the skin, nerves, limbs and eyes.

The second form of Tzoras, continued Rav Shimon, is definitely not Hansen’s Disease, but rather something that the science of medicine cannot prevent or cure. This second form of Tzoras therefore, transcends the laws of the corporeal world, from which it does not originate. Rather, its source is solely from Shamayim, to instruct man that his dealings with other men are found to be deplorably lacking. No team of expert surgeons can remove this second form of Tzoras from its victim, for it is a malady not of physical making.

Simplifying matters, we will heretofore refer to the first form of Tzoras as leprosy or Hansen’s Disease, and to the second as Tzoras from Shamayim.

Now, in order to answer the above question of why the Passuk needed to add the words ‘In the Tzarua,’ Rav Shimon had to prove his position of the two forms of Tzoras in the following manner.

As far as leprosy is concerned, we find it several times in our Tanach. The initial instance deals with Na’aman, who was supreme military commander of Aram: 
“And Na’aman, captain of the army of the king of Aram, was a great man with his master, and highly esteemed, because by him, HaShem had given deliverance to Aram; he was also a mighty man in valor, but he was a M’tzora (afflicted with Tzoras).” (M’lachim II 5:1)

Right off the bat, Tzoras from Shamayim is only meant to afflict Yisroel, not the other nations. Na’aman, certainly not a Yisroel, could not possibly have suffered from it. His Tzoras then, according to Rav Shimon, was Hansen’s Disease, which was cured by eventually following the advice of Elisha HaNavi (the prophet).

Additionally, we see the situation of the four M’tzora’im (persons afflicted by Tzoras) who were outside the city of Shomron, after it was besieged by Ben Hadad, king of Aram: 
“And there were four M’tzora’im at the entrance of the gate; and they said one to another, ‘Why should we sit here until we die?’” (ibid. 7:3)

Now, these four M’tzora’im, confirmed Rav Shimon, had to have suffered from Hansen’s Disease as well. Consider the following. It is a fact, that the city of Shomron was built after the time of Y’hoshua Bin Nun, for we see its origins, when its real estate was purchased by Omri, king of the Kingdom of Yisroel (not Y’huda): 
“And he bought the hill Shomron from Shemer for two talents of silver, and built on the hill, and called the name of the city which he built, after the name of Shemer, owner of the hill, Shomron.” (M’lachim I 16:24)

In Tzoras from Shamayim, M’tzora’im are sent out of the three encampments of Kohanim, L’vi’im, and Yisroelim. Additionally, the only cities such M’tzora’im must leave in Eretz Yisroel, are discussed in Kailim 1-7: 
“…..Cities that are walled (from the time of Y’hoshua) are holier. For, M’tzora’im (those with Tzoras from Shamayim) must be sent out of them…..”

Hence, even if the four M’tzora’im had Tzoras from Shamayim (which they didn’t), there was no obligation from the Torah of them being sent out of the specific city of Shomron, which was built after Y’hoshua entered Canaan. Why then, were they outside the city?

To answer this question, Rav Shimon cited the Gemarah in Sanhedrin 107b, which speaks of Gaichazi, the disciple of Elisha, who stole from Na’aman, and, was cursed by Elisha for it:
“’The Tzoras therefore, of Na’aman shall cleave to you, and to your seed for ever, and he went out from his presence a M’tzora as white as snow.’ (M’lachim II 5:27) 'And there were four M’tzora’im at the at the entrance of the gate.’ Rabbi Yochanan said, ‘They were Gaichazi, and his three sons.’”

Now, it is clear that Gaichazi and his sons were afflicted with Hansen’s Disease, instructed Rav Shimon. For, when Elisha cursed Gaichazi, his exact words were, ‘The Tzoras therefore, of Na’aman shall cleave to you, and to your seed for ever!’ Since Na’aman was afflicted with Hansen’s Disease, the same must have been true for Gaichazi and his sons.

But again, if this is so, posed Rav Shimon, why were the four M’tzora’im barred from the city of Shomron? Initially, their leprosy was not the kind in which the Torah would force them to leave an ‘encampment.’ Second, as we have already seen, Shomron did not have the status of holy, because it was built after Y’hoshua Bin Nun. Why were the four outside the city?

Rav Shimon’s simple response to this is that the Hansen’s Disease of the four men was highly contagious, and certainly threatened others in Shomron. They were therefore, medically quarantined outside the city, not banned entry into Shomron directly from the Torah. In any event, here we have two classic cases in Tanach of Hansen’s Disease, which is a medical matter within the province of science.

But, what of our initial question of what need was there for the Torah to add the seemingly superfluous expression ‘In the Tzarua’? While the route to resolving this seemingly superfluous expression is somewhat circuitous, it does lead to a very satisfying response. And so, with a little more patience, we continue. 

In the Sidra of Sazriya (13:47), the Ramban (Rabbeinu Moshe Ben Nachman 1194-1270) of blessed memory, had this to say: 
“When Yisroel is complete with HaShem, the spirit of HaShem is upon them constantly, to maintain their physical selves, their clothing, and their homes with an attractive (healthy) appearance. When however, one of them will sin, the ugliness (of N’ga’im) will invade his flesh, or his clothing, or his home, to show that HaShem has turned away from him.”

Rav Shamshon R’fael Hirsch (1808-1888) of blessed memory, wrote in similar fashion on this subject, and adds the following. As with all words in LaShon HaKodesh, their meanings are multiple. The term ‘Nega’ in the Torah not only refers to the affliction of Tzoras, it also translates into being touched. That is, explained Rav Shamshon, because of an individual’s indiscretions towards others, HaShem has touched him with these afflictions.

Specifically, what are these indiscretions to others? From the Gemarah in Arachin 16a, we see the following: 
“Rav Shmuel Bar Nachmani said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan, ‘Because of seven things the N’ga’im are incurred: (These are) slander, the shedding of blood, a vain oath, incest, arrogance, robbery and envy.’”

Now, Tzoras from Shamayim, continues Rav Shimon, is certainly not a malady which is contagious or of any threat to anyone else. This can clearly be seen in the Mishna in N’ga’im (chapter 3, Mishna 2): 
“A bridegroom upon whom N’ga’im have appeared is granted exemption from his inspection (by the Kohain) during the seven days of the marriage feast, in respect of his own person…… Similarly, during a Regel (Yom Tov), one is granted exemption from his inspection during all the days of the Regel.”

Hence, concluded Rav Shimon, if these N’ga’im spoken of here were Hansen’s Disease, the contagious kind that posed a threat to others, regardless of the honor of a bridegroom or Yom Tov, it would be essential for the safety of society not to put the matter off for even one second. Nevertheless. the fact that there are times when the inspection of Tzoras from Shamayim must be put off, clearly establishes that it is not contagious or hazardous to society at all, as would be Hansen’s Disease.

Therefore, went on Rav Shimon, the Tzoras from Shamayim which the Torah mentions in this week’s Sidra, has its Tuma controlled by the declaration of the Kohain. For, such N’ga’im are a Mizbai’ach, an altar of forgiveness. And the afflicted must leave the encampment, banished from all men, until he realizes how to honorably deal with others. That, explains Rav Shimon, is why the Passuk states: 
“This is the Torah of him in whom is the Nega of Tzoras…..” (Vayikra 14:32)

‘In whom is the Nega of Tzoras’ expounded Rav Shimon, refers to one who has the Nega sent from Shamayim in him, but is not an actual sufferer of Hansen’s Disease.

And here, we finally come to the answer to what need was there for the Torah to add the seemingly superfluous expression ‘In the Tzarua’? Just as it would have been possible for one to suffer from Tzoras from Shamayim, while not being afflicted with Hansen’s Disease, so too would it have been possible for one to suffer from Tzoras from Shamayim, while being afflicted as well, with Hansen’s Disease. And, it is to such a person, that the Torah refers, when it states: 
“And the Kohain shall go out of the camp; and the Kohain shall look, and, behold, if the disease of Tzoras is healed in the Tzarua.” (Vayikra 14:3)

That is, concluded Rav Shimon, ‘If the disease of Tzoras is healed in the Tzarua’ means that the Torah is speaking of a sufferer of Hansen’s Disease, whose Tzoras from Shamayim, which he had as well, healed (but not his leprosy). And so, the enigma of the seeming extra words ‘In the Tzorua’ is resolved.

It is our privilege alone to delve into the scholarly and profound depths of the Torah HaK’dosha, the repository of all human knowledge. Only we may travel where others may not follow. Only we are bestowed with the birthright of Torah.

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

* * * * * 

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!