Metzora

This portion deals with the purification of the Metzora ("leper"). The leprosy of a human and of garments is dealt with in the previous portion - Tazria - whereas that of houses is defined in Metzora. "And the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying:

"When you come into the land of Canaan which I give you as a possession and I inflict the plague of tzara'at upon a house in the land you possess etc." (Lev.14:33).

In the Midrash (Vayikra Rabba) the order is inverted. Said R.Levi,

"The All- Merciful G-d does not afflict the human body first. And when He afflicts the people with leprosy, He punishes first their houses. If the owner repents the stones of the house are removed; if he does not repent the house is demolished. If he remains impenitent his garments are affected. If he repents they must be washed, but if he does not they must be burnt. Only then does leprosy come upon the person; if he repents he can purify himself, if he does not, he goes into isolation."

Accordingly the plague of the houses should have been stated first in the Torah, followed by the plague of the garments and concluded with the leper, in accordance with the sequence in the Midrash. Even on the assumption that only the law of plagues on persons and on garments was in force in the Desert whereas the law regarding houses was in force only in Eretz Israel, the question remains why the plague on persons precedes that of garments. Furthermore why are the other nations and their lands not subject to these laws and why does the house plague apply even to Israelites only in Eretz Israel as the Mishnah (Nega'im 3:1) rules:

All can be rendered impure by plagues (Inega'im) except gentiles and a Ger Toshav (a non-Jewish citizen of Eretz Israel who had renounced idolatry).

In Hilkhot Tum'at Tzara'at (9:1) Maimonides states:

All are rendered impure, even a one-day old child and (non-Jewish) slaves (these become subject to the same laws that are obligatory for women), but not gentiles or a "Ger Toshav" (a non-Jewish citizen of Eretz Israel who had renounced idolatry).

Regarding the impurity of garments the mishnah (ibid.11:1) states:

All garments can be rendered impure by plagues, except those of gentiles. If one buys garments from gentiles, they must be inspected initially etc.

Thus Maimonides (ibid.13:2):

All woollen and linen garments are susceptible to the plague, except non-Jews' garments. Garments bought from non-Jews must be inspected initially

He further rules (ibid.14:11):

Jerusalem and lands outside Eretz Israel are unsusceptible to the plague, since it is stated (Lev.14:34) 'in a house of the land of your possession', and Jerusalem was not divided among the tribes. Nor are gentiles' houses in Eretz Israel rendered impure by the plague." The laws of the plague apply neither to gentiles nor to their garments or houses though it appears that except for their houses they are susceptible outside Eretz Israel, too.

In his Torah Commentary (Lev.13:47) Ramban (Nahmanides) states regarding the verse: 'The garment in which is the plague the plague of tzara'at, whether it be a woollen garment or a linen garment': "Neither this nor the plague of the house is a natural phenomenon. But when Israel is perfect the Divine spirit is upon them constantly to maintain the good appearance of their bodies, garments and houses. However, as soon as one of them sins, his body, garment or house becomes tainted as a sign that the Lord has turned His back on him. Hence 'and I inflict a plague upon a house in the land of your possession' (ibid.14:34) - though it be a Divine act, it exists only in the land of G-d's possession as it is stated 'when you come into the land of Canaan which I give you for a possession' (ibid. ibid.).

According to Torat Cohanim

"the house-plague law was to apply only after the conquest and distribution (at Joshua's time) of the land when everyone would know his possession, the people dwell in peace and the Divine Presence be upon them. Also the garments' plague would not exist outside Eretz Israel, hence the Torah did not need to exclude it explicitly. Furthermore the law applies only to white but not to colored garments in which the stain might be a natural one caused by the colors but is not evidence of a direct Divine act."

Thus OR HA-HAYIM on the verse,

'When you come into the land of Canaan etc.' (Iibid.ibid.J): It should have been stated '... if there be (and not 'and I inflict the plague of Itzara'atJ'. This reads like a prediction. Our Sages comment: When the Canaanites heard that Israel would occupy their land they hid their treasures. When the houses were afflicted with the plague and had to be demolished the objects hidden inside the walls were uncovered. However, this is a homiletical explanation. Rabbi Levi's interpretation in the Midrash follows the plains sense, i.e., The All-Merciful G-d does not castigate directly the person. Rather, he punishes first the garments and the houses. His answer to the question why the Torah inverts the order should be studied.

Here as well as in Parashat Hukat (Num.19) regarding the impurity conveyed by a dead person the term IadamJ is used. Our Rabbis point out (Yevamot 61a): "You are called adam but not the other nations". Hence, according to Rabbi Shim'on bar Yohai, a gentile corpse does not convey "tent impurity" (i.e., by overshadowing). According to some, impurity by overshadowing applies, according to others even contact impurity it does not convey.

Thus we find a difference between Eretz Israel and the other lands. This accords with the principle that the greater the sanctity the greater the susceptibility to impurity.

According to the Talmud (Ketubot 110b) a person should rather live in Eretz Israel even in a city with a gentile majority, rather than outside the Holy Land even in a city with a Jewish majority. For one who resides in Eretz Israel is like one who has a G-d, but he who lives outside Eretz Israel is like one who has no G-d, since it is stated "to give you the land of Canaan to be your G-d" (Lev.25:38). And does he who does not live in Eretz Israel have no G-d? Rather, he who lives outside Eretz Israel is regarded as if he were an idolater.

Maharsha explains the last sentence which seems a repetition and redundant, and how it answers the question of the previous sentence, as follows: The Lord is G-d of the whole world. Hence, the query "does he who does not live in Eretz Israel have no G-d?" Has G-d not sworn to be our G-d, unconditionally and irrespective of our land of residence? Thereupon the answer is given that such a person accepts G-d's sovereignty as do the gentiles.

Shortly before Moses' death G-d tells him that the people will "go astray after the gods of the IstrangersJ of the land" (Deut. 31:16). According to Rashi strangers refers to the nations of the land. However, according to Ramban, who disagrees with Rashi, it is G-d, called the G-d of the land" - as in "the law of the G-d of the land" (2Kings 17:27) - Who is the stranger in the land, as I have already explained", i.e., concerning "and the land was defiled; and I called it to account for its iniquity, and the land spewed out its inhabitants" (Lev.18:25)... and the Lord is the G-d of gods and the master of all masters of the world. But Eretz Israel, by being populated by Israel, is the particular possession of G-d, dedicated to His Holy Name. No angel was appointed to be its guardian or ruler when G-d gave it as a possession to the nation, descendants of those He loved, that proclaims the Unity of G-d etc." See his full commentary. The following is the meaning of Ramban's words:

The Lord is the G-d of the whole world and particularly of Israel and the land where He chose to rest His Presence over them. Hence he who lives outside Eretz Israel and wants the Lord to be his G-d, as Jacob said (Gen.28:21,) must prepare himself for it. Otherwise the Lord is his G-d in His quality of the Universal G-d, for He is the G-d also of the idolaters. Thus, according to our Sages, the G-d of the world is the G-d of him who lives outside Eretz Israel but he is not a receptacle to receive G-d, and he is as the idolaters.

But the Lord is the G-d as the G-d of the land of him who lives in Eretz Israel, even if he is not a proper receptacle. Further support fo the above stated can be drawn from Ezekiel (36:20) "in that men said of them, These are the people of the Lord, and they are gone out of His land."

The Tabernacle (in the Desert) was made with IshittimJ wood that the Patriarch Jacob had planted (Midrash). The planners and builders were Bezalel, son of Uri, son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah who knew the secrets of the Creation, and Oholiav son of Ahisamakh of the tribe of Dan, and every wisehearted man and woman. Moses spread the tent over the Tabernacle and erected it (Ex.40:17-19).

Regarding the Temple of Jerusalem it is stated (1Kings 5:32), "And the builders of Solomon and the builders of Hirom and the Givlim" (name of a nation, expert stone crumblers and builders - Rashi), i.e., it was admissible that non-Jews should build the Temple. But why was not a setting of purity and sanctity sought after? We shall find the answer only after understanding the halakhic basis. One of the 39 acts of work forbidden on the Sabbath - which are derived from the operations performed during the building of the Temple - is that of building, i.e., building on the ground. According to the Jerusalem Talmud (12:1) the building performed for the construction of the Tabernacle consisted of placing the boards onto the sockets (which latter were on the ground). Hence any addition on the ground, even if without special fastening, constitutes "building". The Authorities differ as to whether the concept of "building" applies to vessels. However, in the case of building on the ground any addition is included in the prohibition whereas in the case of vessels only

• a) the manufacture of a new vessel or,
• b) an attachment requiring craftmanship constitutes "building".

Now the following query arises: If "building" in the case of vessels is regarded as "building on the ground" let the same rules apply; if the two are not equated why should it apply to vessels at all. What is the basis for this compromise? If two parts are connected then either one of the two is the more and the other the less important and insignificant one. Alternatively the two parts merge and become one vessel and each part loses its significance. Hence if attached to the ground, which is the important element in this world, all else that is attached to it loses its importance. But if two movable objects are connected neither can be considered more or less important and the other regarded as nullified. Thus the prohibition of "building" applies only if both are nullified and are used to produce one new vessel. This occurred also in the case of the Tabernacle which had no fixed holy place. Rather it was the Tabernacle that sanctified the ground on which it stood. Hence it had to be manufactured under the most propitious conditions.

However, the permanent Temple of Jerusalem whose ground had been sanctified by the prayers of our Patriarchs and the "sacrificing" of Isaac on Mount Moriah, the site of the Temple, a holy place.

Moreover David sanctified the floor of the future Temple. Hence, and as elaborated above, anything connected to it becomes part of it and becomes holy automatically.

The Lord is particularly the G-d of the land, under any and all circumstances. Nevertheless though He is G-d of Israel, He must be accepted, one must be a "receptacle" and worthy of Him. Hence he who lives in Eretz Israel, on the holy soil where G-d rests His Presence, as stated (Deut.11:12): "A land that the Lord your G-d cares for, the eyes of the Lord your G-d are always upon it, from the beginning of the year to the end of the year", is as if he had a G-d whether he is or is not a receptacle.

Thus every member of the people of Israel who is in Eretz Israel, whether he is or is not a receptacle for G-d, becomes absorbed by the soil of Eretz Israel where G-d resides and is as one who has a G-d. Not so one who lives outside Eretz Israel where he is not a "receptacle" and is not worthy of the Divine Light and G-d's Holy Presence, and where the Divine Light is that of the Universal G-d, and the Lord of the World is his G-d, but on his part it is as if he did not accept the Divine Sovereignty and is regarded as if - as stated in the Talmud - he were an idolater.

Thus our Sages' interpretation of a verse in the Psalms and in Deuteronomy (32:43), "and the land will forgive His people" that he who is buried in Eretz Israel is forgiven all his sins by the G-d of the land. Since, as mentioned above, impurity affects only pure and holy places, the Itzara'atJ plague occurs only in "the land of your possession" where G-d Presence dwells. According to Hasidic teachings everything contains opposites, including our subject of plague - šāņ, whose letters rearranged read ņšā - pleasure.

Rabbi Levi Yitzhak Halperin

Shabbat Shalom