Parashat Metzora
The Subtleties
Of One Letter
We can learn
numerous lessons from the statement of the owner of a house that appears to be
afflicted with spiritual defilement.
By Rabbi Avraham Fischer
The following article is reprinted with permission from the
Orthodox Union.
The first signs of tzara’at[a disease often
translated as leprosy]must be examined carefully.
Tzara’atis the collective name for afflictions that attack the body,
clothing or house; the usual translation of “leprosy” is inaccurate. Tzara’at
is a source of tum’ah (a hard word to translate as well; the best we
might say is “spiritual defilement” determined by physical conditions), and
requires purification (taharah).
The rabbis teach that Hashemincurstzara’at
on one whose character is flawed by, for example, speaking ill of others or
selfishness (Tractate Arachin 15-16). At first his house is affected,
then his clothing, and only after these manifestations is his body afflicted.
Tzara’atis a “good pain,” punishing him at a stage when these faults
can still be rectified.
First comes house-tzara’at:
When you will come to the land of Canaan which I give to
you for a possession, and I will put the plague of tzara’at in a house of the
land of your possession. And he to whom the house belongs shall come and tell
the priest, saying: ‘Something like a plague has appeared to me in the house.’
Then the priest shall command that they empty the house, before the priest
comes to view the plague, so that all that is in the house be not made tamei (spiritually
defiled); then afterwards the priest shall come to view the house
(Vayikra 14:34-36).
Rashi refers to the Mishnah(Nega’im
12:5): Even if the owner of the house who notices the signs is a scholar, and
is able to determine with certainty that this is tzara’at, he may not
state categorically “nega”--“A plague has appeared to me in the
house,” but rather “k’nega”--“Something like a plague has
appeared to me in the house.” The Rambam codifies this in the Laws of the
Uncleanness of Tzara’at (14:4).
Why dilute the truth?As the Siftei Chachamim
(Shabbetai Bass, 1641-1718) points out, at first the Torah says, “and I will
put the plague of tzara’at,” which indicates certainty. So, why should the
Torah now insist on the words ofuncertainty, “Something like a
plague?”
However, even if the owner of the housewere to make a
definitive statement, it would have no effect, because, as the Mishnah teaches
(Nega’im 3:1), “Uncleanness and cleanness are in the power of the Kohen
(priest):” the Kohen tells him whether to declare “tamei,” and only then does
the house become tamei. The Kohen’s proclamation is intrinsic to the creation
of reality. All the owner does is provide the basis for creating that reality.
This leads to the questionasked by R. Eliyahu
Mizrachi (c.1450-1526): Why must the owner say “k’nega?” After all, prior to
the Kohen’s proclamation there is no tum’ah. So, what harm would there be in
the owner saying “nega?” Whatever he says will not change the situation anyway!
A comprehensive summaryof the major points of view in
this question is presented by R. Yom Tov Lipmann Heller (1579-1654) in his
commentary Tosefot Yom Tov on the Mishnah. He discusses five opinions:
1. R. Mizrachi quotes his teachers: The Torah is teaching a
lesson in proper behavior (derech eretz), to speak with reservation and
humility, even when the situation looks unequivocally clear. As the Talmud
says, “Teach your tongue to say ‘I do not know’” (Tractate Berachot 4a).
2. R. Mizrachi himself suggests two answers. First: Since
the Kohen is the only one to determine whether or not the house is unclean, for
anyone else to say so would be disrespectful towards the position of the Kohen.
This is similar to the prohibition against a student, even a very knowledgeable
one, rendering a halachic (Jewish legal) decision in the presence of his
teacher (Tractate Sanhedrin 5b).
3. R. Mizrachi’s
second answer is that the Kohen should not be rushed into making his
proclamation. By the owner saying “k’nega,” he is taking some of the pressure
off the Kohen.
4. Gur Aryeh (R. Yehudah Loew ben Betzalel, the
Maharal of Prague, c. 1525-1609) states: The owner may not say, “A plague,”
simply because it is not true. Until the Kohen proclaims it tamei, it is not a
plague, and must not be spoken of as such, because “He that tells lies shall
not remain” (Psalms 101:7).
5. Korban Aharon (R. Aharon ben Avraham ibn Chayim;
1545-1632) comments: When the symptoms of tzara’at appear in the house, it is a
plague, but it does not attain the status of tamei until the Kohen declares it
so. Meanwhile, however, it is still possible that the plague will dim and the
Kohen will then proclaim tahor. At this stage, the owner is enjoined, “Do not
open your mouth to the Satan” (Tractate Berachot 19a): do not foreshadow
a worst-case scenario.
One question remains: Why doesn’t this insistence on
saying k’nega also apply to body-tzara’at or clothing-tzara’at? Tosefot Yom
Tov notes that house-tzara’at is the first stage in the process. Once the
clothing or body has been afflicted the die has been cast and it’s too late.
Perhaps here we can incorporate the idea from the Korban
Aharon. At this unresolved stage between k’nega and nega, all is not lost.
In fact, Hashem is doing the owner of the house a favor by making him aware of
a fault in his character. This seeming-plague is an alarm bell, a wake-up call
to repentance. Now is not the time to take a negative attitude, but to welcome
the warning before matters deteriorate.
From this one halacha (law), we gain many insights
into the values that must suffuse Torah learning:
Pursue truth with humility.
Respect those in positions of honor.
Make decisions without haste.
Be accurate.
Remain open to positive results.
Be ready for initiatives to self-improvement.
Be careful with each word.
All this from “k’nega!” How much can be learned from
just one letter!
