Abraham and the High Priest

With this shall Aaron come into the holy place: with a young bullock (par ben bakar) for a sin offering, and a ram for a burnt offering.                          Leviticus 16:3

“A young bullock”: this is Abraham, as the verse [Genesis 18:7] “And Abraham ran to the herd, and fetched a calf (ben bakar)…”                   Breishit Rabba

My saintly teacher, Rabbi Mordechai Rogov, explained the connection between Abraham and the High Priest entering the Holy of Holies as part of the service of Yom Kippur.

Abraham’s running to fetch a calf (according to the Midrash, three calves, to be able to serve each of his guests tongue, a great delicacy) represents our Patriarch’s devotion to serving his guests. Even as God visited Abraham, no doubt bringing him to a spiritual level in which he had no concern for worldly things, Abraham still remained concerned for his guests, so great was his love for his fellow men.

Similarly, our Sages taught that when the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur, he reached the level of angels rather than that of a human being. Yet the High Priest’s prayer included concern for the worldly needs of the nation of Israel (as we read in the Musaf of Yom Kippur).

Thus our Midrash teaches that it is the High Priest’s ability to remain concerned for the welfare of every Jew, despite his personal detachment from all mundane matters, the approach of Abraham, which allows the High Priest to enter the Holy of Holies.

The Final Change of Clothes

Parashat Aḥarei Mot begins with a description of the service of the High Priest on Yom Kippur.

The High Priest entered the Holy of Holies only as part of the service of Yom Kippur. There are three spheres of sanctity: time, place and man. When the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies, these three spheres converged.

During the Yom Kippur service, the High Priest changed between the “white garments” (four priestly garments, made exclusively of linen) and the “golden garments” (an additional four garments, which were made of dyed wool and golden threads as well as linen). The order of changing garments was as follows: the High Priest ritually rinsed his hands and feet, removed the garments, immersed himself in a mikve, changed garments and again rinsed his hands and feet.

Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch notes that the final ritual rinsing of hands and feet was when the High Priest changed from his Temple garments to his own clothes at the end of Yom Kippur. Thus, says Rabbi Hirsch, this final change of clothing is actually part of the Yom Kippur service. In a sense, Rabbi Hirsch suggests, this final change of clothing is the essence of the Yom Kippur service. If everything the High Priest has done remains behind in the Temple, he has accomplished nothing.  The service of the Temple has meaning only when it is applied in concrete life outside the Temple. “That which is striven for in the holy garments must wait for its true meaning for what is accomplished in secular clothing.”

The Fine Voice, the Fine Line

And he shall take a censer full of coals of fire from the altar before the Lord, and his hands full (m’lo ḥofnav) of incense ground small (dakka), and bring it within the veil.           Leviticus 16:12

The incense was offered daily. However, the incense of Yom Kippur was prepared differently than the daily incense.  In our verse, the Torah instructs that the incense of Yom Kippur be dakka (“fine”). While the spices were ground for the daily incense, for Yom Kippur they were ground a second time, to be “fine”.

Ba’al haTurim connects the word dakka as it appears in our verse with the same word which appears in describing God’s revelation to the Prophet Elijah:

            ... and after the earthquake a fire; but the Lord was not in the fire;

            and after the fire a still small voice (kol d’mama dakka) I kings 19:12

The common use of the word "daka" teaches that it is through unity that Israel will merit hearing the “small still voice of” God.

My father explained the connection between the incense and divine revelation, based upon a unique aspect of the incense. One of the eleven ingredients of the incense was ḥelbana, which by itself was foul smelling. Yet without the ḥelbana, there can  be no incense. Our Sages taught that the lesson is that we must include even the sinners as part of the People of Israel. Thus, the incense represents the unity of Israel. It is this unity which allows us to experience divine revelation. (We can note that the greatest divine revelation, at Mount Sinai too was preceded by the unity of the Israelites.  The Torah tells us that “Israel encamped before the mount (Sinai)” (Exodus 19:2), using the singular, not the plural. As our Sages commented “Israel encamped as a single person, with a single heart”.)

Ba’al haTurim makes another connection between the wording of our verse and another verse in the Prophets. “And his hands full” (m’lo ḥofnav), says Ba’al haTurim, is related to the use of the word m’lo in II Samuel 8:2:

                        and he measured two lines to put to death

and a full line (m’lo haḥevel) to keep alive.

Ba’al haTurim comments that it was through the Yom Kippur service that Israel was victorious.

Again, my father explained that it was specifically through the unity of Israel, as represented by the incense, that victory was achieved. 

White and Gold Garments, Personal and Communal Property

He shall put on the holy linen tunic, and have linen pants on his body, and he must gird himself with a linen sash, and bind (his head) with a linen turban; they are the holy garments...           Leviticus 16:4

For the parts of Yom Kippur service performed in the Holy of Holies, the High Priests wore the “white garments,” pure linen garments, as opposed to the “golden garments” worn for the remaining parts of the service. This approach serves as a paradigm for all those who wish to approach the holy [v.3] and achieve sanctity. One must approach devoid of gold or any other tangible possession, but only with his/her good deeds, and in purity.

The garments worn by the High Priest during the performance of the service on Yom Kippur were not his private property. In contrast, because he could not achieve atonement through the public, the High Priest must have purchased the bull he brought as his sin offering using his own money. [16:3]

There is a significant lesson: when it comes to accepting responsibility, the High Priest cannot hide behind the community, but must accept his personal responsibility. On the other hand, concerning sanctity, the High Priest must understand that he is able to achieve sanctity through the klal and as their representative. Responsibility must be personal, while privilege stems from the community.

Entering the Holy of Holies With Bundles of Mitzvot

With this (b’zot) shall Aaron come into the holy place...                                   Leviticus 16:3

Stressing the initial word of our verse, which begins the description of the service of the High Priest on Yom Kippur, our Sages comment that the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies “with bundles of mitzvot in his hands”:

With the merit of Torah, as it is written [Deuteronomy 4:44] “this (v’zot) is the Torah”, With the merit of mila (circumcision), as it is written [Genesis 17:10] “this (zot) is My covenant which you shall observe”, With the merit of Shabbat, as it is written [Isaiah 56:2] “happy is the one who does this (zot)”, With the merit of Jerusalem, as it is written [Ezekiel 5:5] “this (zot) is Jerusalem”, With the merit of the tribes, as it is written [Genesis 49:28] “and this (v’zot) is what their father spoke to them”.   Midrash Vayikra Rabba

My father explained that our Sages’ intention is well beyond simply noting the coincidence of the use of the word “zot”. As the High Priest enters the Holy of Holies, the place from which sanctity emanates and spreads to the entire People, he must realize that it is not his own merit which allows him to enter. It is through the merit of Torah, and the fact that the Children of Israel observe Torah and fulfill God’s covenant of mila that he is able to enter.

As well, the merit of Shabbat is one of the factors which allows the High Priest to enter the Holy of Holies. Shabbat represents the sanctity of time. The Midrash teaches us that the three spheres of sanctity, time man and place, are interrelated. Man has the power to sanctify himself. When he does, he is able as well to sanctify time and place.

The merit of Jerusalem and the merit of the tribes represent the unity of Israel, as our Sages consistently teach us that the destiny of Jerusalem is to unite the Jewish people. This unity endows the High Priest with strength.

Rashi notes that the gematriya of “b’zot” equals 410, the number of years the First Temple stood.

Perhaps the reason the verse hints specifically at the First Temple and not the Second is the fact that during the First Temple period, the high priests were righteous men [indeed, the entire 410 years, only eighteen men served as high priests. By contrast, during the Second Temple period, many of the high priests were less than righteous men [who bought the position] who did not complete a year in office, dying when they entered the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur. Thus the Torah stresses “b’zot”, the High Priest must perform the Yom Kippur service in the way of Torah in order for the service to be meaningful and accomplish its goal of atonement for the nation. 

The Secret of the Cloud of Incense

With this (b’zot) shall Aaron come into the holy place …                       Leviticus 16:3 Aaron may enter only with the cloud of the incense.                   Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 53a

One of the eleven spices of the incense was ḥelbana, which by itself was foul-smelling. Yet if the ḥelbana, were omitted, the incense is invalid. Our Sages taught that the lesson is that we must include even the sinners as part of the People of Israel. Thus, the incense represents the unity of Israel. It is this unity which allows Aaron to enter the Holy of Holies as the intercessor to seek atonement on behalf of the nation Israel. The incense must be a reminder to Aaron (and his descendants, the subsequent High Priests) to include even the less than righteous individuals as part of the People of Israel. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the priests, as educators in Israel, to bring the sinners close to God through repentance, which is the essence of Yom Kippur.

The Educator's Place

And God said to Moses: speak to Aaron your brother that he not come at all times into the Sanctuary, within the curtain, before the cover of the ark, that he die not, for I appear in the cloud upon the ark – cover.                      Leviticus 16:2

My father suggested that the words intended for Aaron: “that he not come at all times into the Sanctuary” convey a powerful lesson about the Torah’s approach.

The kohanim were the educators of Israel, those whose responsibility it was to teach the nation Torah and to lead the people in the path of sanctity.

The verse’s choice of words teaches us the Torah’s approach: the religious leaders must not “come at all times into the Sanctuary”, they may not isolate themselves within the holy confines, rather, they must maintain contact with those whom they are charged to teach. Further, in order to truly achieve sanctity, as the Torah defines the term, there must be contact with the mundane aspects of life. One who isolates himself within the holy precinct cannot sanctify life, which is the Torah’s ideal.

Personal and Communal Purity

And the Lord spoke to Moses, after the death of the two sons of Aaron, when they drew near before the Lord, and died.                          Leviticus 16:1

Metzora, the previous parasha, ends with the instruction: “Thus shall you separate the Children of Israel from their impurity, that they not die in their impurity, when they defile My Tabernacle that is in the midst of them.”

My father commented that the way of Torah is for one to be pure and avoid personal (ritual) impurity and conveying impurity to others.

Yet, equally, Torah teaches that every individual has responsibility for his fellow men and therefore, drawing near before the Lord, to the extent of abandoning fellow men and complete withdrawal from society, can lead to ones death.

Similarly, in verse 2, Moses is told to convey to Aaron “that he not come at all times into the holy place…” Torah’s approach does not confine sanctity to the holy precincts, quite the contrary, the ideal is to sanctity one’s daily life in all its aspects, and it is that sanctity which will allow one to enter the holy place.

Parameters of Change

And the Lord spoke to Moses, after the death of the two sons of Aaron, when they drew near before the Lord, and died.                                 Leviticus 16:1

The opening verse of our parasha implies a connection between the deaths of Nadab and Abihu and the content of God’s words to Moses.

Rabbi Levi [Babylonian Talmud, Gittin 60a) tells us that the connection is chronological, rather than topical. Though the words spoken here to Moses are the details of the Yom Kippur service, it was said to him by God on the day Aaron’s sons died.

Rabbi Ḥiyya son of Abba [Jerusalem Talmud, Yoma 1:1] notes that the sons of Aaron died on the first of Nissan and asks why the verse mentions their deaths in connection with Yom Kippur. The lesson, says Rabbi Ḥiyya is that just as Yom Kippur effects atonement, so too does the death of a zaddik (righteous person).  Thus the content is related.

Rashi, based upon Midrash Torat Kohanim, suggest another topical correlation. The purpose of mentioning the deaths of Nadab and Abihu is to stress that even the High Priest must be extremely careful in entering the Temple.

My father suggested an additional connection. In one midrashic opinion, the sin of Nadab and Abihu was their desire to replace the leadership of Moses and Aaron. They felt the older generation needed to be replaced with younger, more dynamic leaders. In essence, Aaron’s sons lost sight of the truth that Torah must be our guide in life. Rather than adapting themselves to the requirements of Torah, they tried to bend Torah to accommodate their desires.

The connection between the deaths of Nadab and Abihu and the Yom Kippur service lies here in the contrast between the actions of Aaron’s sons and the lesson of Yom Kippur. Change is desirable, for without change there can be no progress. However, it is necessary to differentiate between the physical and spiritual realms. Sanctity comes to man from God Himself. The closer one is to God as the Source, the holier he is. To change is to deviate from the Source and hence to regress rather than progress. Yom Kippur, ideally, is a day which influences our entire lives for the coming year.  Yom Kippur is a time of return to the Source. If changes are to be made, they are by us to comply with God’s wishes. 

Pesaḥ and Mila

There are a number of significant similarities between the mitzvot of Korban Pesaḥ and Brit Mila. These are the only two positive mitzvot where the punishment for failure to fulfill the mitzva is karet. Further, an uncircumcised male may not eat of the Korban Pesach.

The verse from Ezekiel [16:6]

.. and I said to you: in your blood, live; yea, I said to you: in your blood, live

is included in the Haggadah, as well as being recited at a Brit Mila.

Rashi, quoting our Sages, explains the repetition of the phrase “in your blood, live” as referring to the blood of Pesaḥ and the blood of mila, through which the Israelites were redeemed from Egypt.

My father explained that God instructed us to spill a little of our own blood as preparation for freedom. The lesson is clear: although many are willing to spill others’ blood to attain freedom, the Torah teaches that one must be willing to spill his own blood if freedom is to be achieved.

My saintly teacher, Rabbi Mordechai Rogov offered an additional explanation of the connection between the blood of korban Pesaḥ and that of mila: the blood of the Paschal lamb is the symbol of freedom from subjugation by others, whereas the blood of mila symbolizes freedom from oneself, freedom from the evil inclination, from the desires and impulses which enslave a person. Subjugation to one’s impulses can create the worst form of servitude, completely depriving one of his/her freedom.

In establishing mila as the prerequisite for korban Pesaḥ, the Torah teaches us that to be able to truly appreciate freedom, we must first achieve freedom from our enslaving passions. Without the blood of mila, freedom from oneself, the blood of Pesaḥ, freedom from others cannot be established.

Rabban Gamliel's Three Lessons of Pesaḥ

Rabban Gamliel used to say: whoever does not mention these three things on Passover has not fulfilled his obligation, and these are the three: Pesaḥ (the Paschal offering), matza and maror (bitter herbs).         Haggada

My father noted that the three symbols of Passover are not merely reminders of historical events which occurred thousands of years ago, but convey guidelines and lessons for us to follow in our contemporary lives.

Pesaḥ, the paschal lamb, is a reminder of the Almighty’s personal redemption of our People. It is He Himself who brought us out of Egypt to give us our freedom. The paschal lamb is also a reminder of Jewish identification. In Egypt, our fathers were instructed to take the lamb and sprinkle its blood on the doorposts and lintels of their homes, in order to identify themselves as Israelites. Only after identifying themselves as Israelites were our ancestors redeemed. This lesson carries tremendous contemporary meaning: if we gain freedom but lose our Jewish identity, in truth there is no gain, but everything is lost.

Matza reminds us that freedom requires preparation, as the Haggada explains: 

Why do we eat this matza? Because the dough of our fathers did not suffice to rise until the King of Kings, the Holy One blessed be He, appeared to them and redeemed them.

When the hour of redemption came, the Israelites were not prepared, as the verse quoted in the Haggada states: “they were driven out of Egypt and could not delay, and they had not prepared any provisions.” [Exodus 12:39] Instead of eagerly awaiting the moment of redemption, the Israelites had to be driven out of Egypt, and because they were not ready for freedom, they had to wander for forty years and die in the desert without being privileged to enter the Promised Land.

Maror is a reminder not only of the enslavement affliction and torture of our nation in Egypt, but a call as well to be concerned with the suffering of our people in the present. We cannot enjoy our personal freedom knowing that some of our brothers are not free.  

Remembering: A Contemporary Experience

The following is taken from my father's writings:
The Seder is all about remembering the exodus from Egypt (which is a daily obligation).

We remember not to build up an inferiority complex due to our past as slaves, but rather to understand that every human being is entitled to freedom. Israel’s redemption from Egyptian enslavement laid the foundation for all subsequent freedoms for all of mankind, as the Haggada teaches: “Had the Holy One, blessed be He, not taken us out of Egypt, we and our sons and our sons’ sons would still be enslaved.” Had God not redeemed His nation from Egypt, the concept of freedom would have been unknown.

Yet, the greater message is that the true meaning of freedom is accepting responsibility.

Remembering the events of Israel’s distant past must serve a contemporary purpose: we remember in order to draw courage and strength to deal with our own crises. Reflecting on the events of a hundred generations ago should provide us with the ability to overcome whatever persecution Israel experiences. It is of great significance that even in the hell of concentration camps, our brothers and sisters celebrated the holiday of freedom. 

The Resurrected Dry Bones

Based upon the Talmudic statement [Megila 31a], the haftara (prophetic reading) for Shabbat Ḥol HaMoed Pesaḥ is Ezekiel’s vision in the Valley of the Dry Bones [37:1-14]. While the Talmud gives no reason for its choice of this chapter, Rav Hai Gaon [939 - 1038] notes that tradition is that resurrection of the dead, the subject of the verses, will take place during Ḥol HaMoed Pesach.

The final verses of the haftara [13-14] are:

And you shall know that I am God, when I have opened your graves, and caused you to come up out of your graves, O My people. And I will put My spirit in you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own Land; and you shall know that I God have spoken, and performed it, says God.

In commenting on these verses, Rabbi Yehonatan Eybschutz quotes our Sages’ tradition [Babylonian Talmud, Ketuvot 111a, Otiot d’Rebbi Akiva, letter tet] that resurrection will take place only in the Holy Land. The poetic version of the latter source reads:

At the time of resurrection, the Holy One, blessed be He, will descend from the upper heavens, sit on His throne in Jerusalem, summon His ministering angels and instruct them to wander to the four corners of the world and raise up the four corners of the world to create tunnels in the ground to bring the righteous of the Diaspora to the Land of Israel before Me.

Rabbi Yehonatan takes the approach a step further and comments (as does Malbim, who lived a century after Rabbi Yehonatan) that in Ezekiel’s vision, the Diaspora is equated with graves. Rabbi Yehonatan writes:

It is known to all that the completeness of Jewish life cannot be achieved in the exile, and thus the prophet compares us to dry bones.

Further, Malbim distinguishes between the collective and individual Israel (as does Rabbi Kook), noting that the collective is eternal, while the individual’s eternity is dependent upon resurrection. It is possible that this point explains the connection between the Land and resurrection, since our Sages teach that it is the Land which unites the individual with the nation.

      The Talmud [Sanhedrin, 92b] presents conflicting opinions among Tanaim (authors of the Mishna) as to whether Ezekiel merely saw a prophetic vision (the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda) or actually witnessed the resurrection (the approach of the remaining Sages quoted: Rabbi Eliezer; Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yose the Galilean; Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Yehuda, son of Beteira).

Following the opinion of the majority of Tanaim, the authors of the Gemara (Amoraim) suggest five differing identifications of those who were resurrected. Rav posits that it was the sons of Ephraim, who incorrectly calculated the end of the 400 year period of  enslavement and left Egypt for Israel thirty years too early, only to be annihilated by the men of Gat [I Chronicles 7:20-21]. Rabbi Yoḥanan asserts that it was the Jewish lads “whose beauty shamed the sun,” who were exiled by Nebuchadnezzar and killed by the Babylonians in the Dura Valley (see the Talmudic discussion for details). Since God refers to those to be resurrected as “these slain” [v.9], it would seem that the opinions of Rav and Rabbi Yoḥanan are the best fits to the simple meaning of the verses.

Rav teaches that those who died trying to reach Israel will be brought back to life and allowed to live in the Land, while Rabbi Yoḥanan teaches that those who were exiled from the Land and killed outside the Land will be privileged to return to her.

Through a Window, Through a Slit

This Dvar Torah is taken from my father's writings.

… behold, he stands behind our wall, he looks in through the windows, he peers through the slits.                                                                               Song of Songs 2:9

            Our Sages taught that the entire Song of Songs is an allegory of the love between the Holy One, blessed be He, and Israel, His chosen nation, thus the subject of our verse can be understood to be God Himself and the word “he” to be capitalized. At times, the Almighty looks after His people through the window, at times He merely peeks through a relatively small slit.

            When God looks at us through a window, we can “see” Him just as He sees us, but when He looks through a slit, He can see us, but we cannot see Him. Yet, whether or not we see Him, God always looks after His people. Even when He looks after Israel only through a slit, those who are interested will be able to perceive His presence and providence. Only one who closes his eyes and does not seek at all will fail to perceive God’s direct providence over the Children of Israel. One who truly looks will be able to see God’s guiding hand, even if only through a slit and not a window.

Means and End

And they shall know that I am the Lord their God, Who brought them out of the land of Egypt, that I may dwell among them. I am the Lord their God.                                                       Exodus 29:46

Our verse stresses that the exodus from Egypt was goal oriented; its purpose was not merely to take the Israelites from Egypt, but to bring them to the situation where God will dwell among them.

This verse does not stand independently, but must be understood in connection with God’s second charge to Moses concerning the redemption from Egyptian bondage:

Therefore say to the Children of Israel: I am the Lord, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from their bondage, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm, and with great judgments; and I will take you to Me as a people, and I will be for you a God, and you shall know that I am the Lord your God, who brought you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. And I will bring you into the Land which I lifted up my hand to give to Abraham Isaac and Jacob, and it will be a heritage for you. I am the Lord.    Exodus 6:6-8

These verses clearly state that the purpose of the exodus was to bring Israel into its Land, while our verse adds the dimension which conveys the significance of the Land: it is within the Land that the nation of Israel will be able to bring the Shechina into its midst, as our Sages taught that the Holy Land is the land of the Shechina.

In essence, the exodus was not a goal but a means to bring Israel to its own Land. Yet entering the Land is not the final goal, rather the means to allow God to dwell among His people.

For Israel to dwell in its Land without striving to bring the Shechina into the nation is to confuse the means and the goal.

Ascent from Egypt

I am God, and I brought you up from the land of Egypt to be your God. Therefore, since I am holy, you must (also) remain holy.                                          Leviticus 11:45 I, God, have brought you up from Egypt on condition that you accept the yoke of mitzvot.         Midrash Safra 10:12

Sefat Emet explains that the phrase “brought you up from the land of Egypt” conveys a higher level than “took you out of Egypt,” which we find in other verses [Leviticus 22:33; Deuteronomy 13:6]. In essence, the exodus was a means, not an end, and its purpose was to elevate the nation of Israel from the degradation of enslavement in Egypt to the level of freedom, which as our Sages taught, requires acceptance of Torah and mitzvot.

Maharal of Prague [Gevurot haShem, chap. 45] phrases Sefat Emet’s point somewhat differently: God says: “I have taken you out of Egypt for the purpose of elevating you.”

Israel’s ascent from Egypt was completed only upon the nation’s entrance into its Land, as we read [Deuteronomy 6:23] ” We are the ones He brought out of there, to bring us to the land He promised our fathers, and give it to us.” There is a progressive process, from exodus to acceptance of Torah at Mount Sinai to entering the Land, which is the ideal place for fulfillment of mitzvot.

Seen from this perspective, it is not at all surprising that the Holy Tongue refers to coming into the Land as “aliya” (“ascent”, the root word used in our verse).

The Land of Canaan and the Land of Israel's Inheritance

When you come to the land of Canaan, which I am giving to you as an inheritance, I will place the mark of the leprous curse in houses in the Land of your inheritance.                                                           Leviticus 14:34

In thus introducing the laws of tzara’at habayit (which applies only within the Holy Land [Mishna Nega’im 12:4]), the verse uses two different names of the Land, opening with “the land of Canaan” and closing with “the Land of your inheritance.”

      Rabbi Yehonatan Eybschutz offers an insightful explanation of the Torah’s choice of words. Since the connotation of the name “land of Canaan” is the ultimate level of degradation [Leviticus 18:3 and Rashi and Ramban there], in Rabbi Kook’s words “the repository of defilement and human degradation,” the verse begins by using this name to explain why a relatively minor offence (haughtiness, as Rashi comments on verse 4, based upon our Sages’ teaching) will cause “an evil spirit” to permeate the walls of a home in Israel. Just as it is often the case that one who suffered an illness and was cured is more susceptible to a recurrence of that illness, so too the houses of the Land, which were exposed to the great impurities of the Canaanites, yet were purified by Israel’s arrival in the Land, are especially susceptible to a recurrence of the impurities of Canaan.

The verse ends by using the name “the Land of your inheritance” in order to obviate an implied question: if, indeed, a relatively small sin can cause “an evil spirit” to permeate the walls of a home in the Land, why did this not happen during the degradation of the tenure of the Canaanites within the Land? The answer, explains Rabbi Yehonatan, is that since the Land has been the inheritance of Israel from the time of creation, the Canaanites never had true sovereignty over her, and as our Sages taught [Babylonian Talmud Pesachim 90a] “one does not have the power to effect a prohibition on that which is not his.” However, once Israel entered to take control of the Land in practice, the houses of the Land become susceptible to the “evil spirit.”

Rabbi Yehonatan adds another implication of the phrase “the Land of your inheritance:” when Israelites see themselves as the natural masters of the Land, and fail to appreciate that we are but sojourners at the pleasure of the true Master of the Land, we invite a plague upon our homes, the effect of which will be to remove us from those homes [v. 40 ff.]

     Thus, the Torah’s wording conveys significant lessons concerning our attitude to the Land.

Good Tidings That Plagues Affect Their Houses

The owner of the house shall come and tell the priest, “It looks to ma (nir'eh li)  as if there is (something) like a (nega)  mark (of tzara'at) in the house."     Leviticus 14:35

Ba’al haTurim connects our verse’s use of the words “nir’eh li” with that in an additional verse: “From afar the Lord appeared to me (nir’eh li)…” [Jeremiah 31:2]:

The common use of the phrase conveys that it is when one has distanced himself from God, so that He appears only from afar, he is likely to be struck with tzara’at. Indeed, Naḥmanides comments that a house can be stricken with tzara’at only when the Shechina leaves it.

Additionally, we can understand the lesson to be that when one looks afar to God and realizes that He is the source of the affliction (nega), it should begin the process of repentance, turning the affliction into a positive thing, as our Sages taught: “It is good tidings for them that plagues affect their houses.“

The Spiritual State

When you come into the land of Canaan, which I give you for a possession, and I put a plague of tzara’at in a house of the land of your possession …                Leviticus 14:34

In our parasha, the Torah presents the laws of tzara’at affecting houses. Naḥmanides comments that this is a supernatural phenomenon. Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch notes that the wording of the verse supports Naḥmanides’ approach. Firstly, God here speaks in the first person: “I put a plague in a house ...” Secondly, Rabbi Hirsch explains that the word nega (plague) generally refers “not to a condition of ordinary disease, but to one which comes as specially sent by God.” Based upon the root word, “the person affected (by a nega) is literally touched by the finger of God.” Further, the laws of tzara’at habayit (of a house) apply only in the Land of Israel.

Beyond the apparently peculiar nature of these laws, our Sages tell us that tzara’at habayit was actually a blessing for the Israelites. By destroying the affected house, the Children of Israel would find treasures hidden away by the Canaanites.

My father explained that the Torah wishes to teach us the meaning of a Jewish state within the Land of Israel. Essentially, states are physical entities. But a Jewish state must be built upon a solid spiritual foundation, it must have a neshama, a soul and spirit of its own. A house in Israel should reflect not only the economic conditions of the Land, but the spiritual as well. Our Sages teach us that tzara’at affects human beings as a result of envy and jealousy. The lesson of tzara’at habayit is that when there is moral decay in society, one must not barricade himself within his own four walls. Rather, one must take action to alleviate the situation, lest ones own four walls be affected.

It is a blessing for Israel when the people are able to see what is wrong and correct it.

Curing the Cured

... and behold the plague of tzara’at has been healed from the metzora. Leviticus 14:3

It seems odd that the verse refers to the “metzora” after he has been healed from tzara’at. Apparently equally out of place is the Midrashic comment quoted by Rashi in explanation of the use of cedar wood, crimson died wool and hyssop in the purification ritual [verse 4]: “what is the cure that he may be healed ...,” since the metzora has been cured before bringing his sacrifices.

      Torah teaches that the metzora can be fully healed only when he has completely removed the cause of tzara’at from himself. Since tzara’at is a punishment for speaking lashon hara, the cure can be achieved only when the metzora has removed the source of his tzara’at.

Daylight Purification

This shall be the law of the metzora in the day of his purification: he shall be brought to the Kohen.                                                                  Leviticus 14:2

The verse’s wording “in the day of his purification” teaches that a metzora may not be declared pure at night.     Rashi

Just as the halacha established that the “plagues” discussed in our parasha cannot be examined by a Kohen at night, and therefore, impurity cannot be declared at night, so too the Kohen may not declare purity at night.

The symbolism of the halachic approach is that we must not use candles to look for faults in our fellow man (as noted, our Sages teach that tzara’at is punishment for speaking evil of others [lashon hara] and other shortcomings).

Equally, one can be cured only in the light of day, that is, when the metzora becomes aware of his faults and repents.

Death and Life in the Power of the Tongue

Tzara’at requires examination by a Kohen. Without the Kohen’s declaration, one cannot be called a metzora. At the end of the period of tzara’at, the affected cannot become tahor (ritually pure) without a Kohen’s declaration. Thus, the verse reads:

And the Kohen shall go outside the camp, and the Kohen shall look, and behold, the plague of tzara’at is healed from the tzaru’a (one afflicted with tzara’at). [Leviticus 14:3]

Though the person has been healed, he is yet a tzaru’a, until the Kohen declares him to be tahor.

These laws convey a valuable educational lesson. Our Sages taught that tzara’at afflicts one as a result of lashon hara, speaking ill of one’s fellow. The requirement of the Kohen’s declaration teaches the metzora the power of speech. Ultimately, it is not only the symptoms of tzara’at, but the word “tamei” or “tahor” uttered by the Kohen which decides the individual’s status.

As part of the ritual of purification, the healed metzora must bring two “living pure birds.” [14:4] The halacha establishes that the two birds should be similar in appearance, size and value. One bird is chosen by the Kohen to be slaughtered, the other is to be let free. (14:5 -6) This ritual strengthens the lesson by demonstrating that the power of words can determine life and death, as King Solomon taught us “Death and life are in the power of the tongue.” [Proverbs 18:21]

Mother Land

When you come into the land of Canaan which I give you for a possession, and I put a plague of tzara’at in a house of the Land of your possession.         Leviticus 14:34 

The verse uses two different names of the Holy Land, first “the land of Canaan” and then “the Land of your possession.”

Our Sages comment on the significance of the name “land of Canaan”:

There are seven (Canaanite) nations, yet the Land is named for Canaan. The Rabbis say this hints that just as Ḥam sinned and his father Canaan was punished [Genesis 9:22-25] so too Israel sins, but the Land is cursed. 

                                                          vaYikra Rabba 17:5

Thus, our Sages teach that the lesson of tzara’at of houses is that the Land suffers punishment instead of the nation. Based upon this Midrash, Rabbi Moshe Ḥagiz (1672–1744) writes that the Land is comparable to the mother of the nation of Israel, who suffers for the sake of her children and gives them life and vitality.

We find a similar concept concerning the destruction of the Temple:

“A song of Asaph. O God, the heathens have come into Your inheritance; they have defiled Your holy temple; they have made Jerusalem into heaps.” Is it fitting for Asaph to sing? On the contrary, should he not lament? (Rather), Asaph said it is good that the Holy One, blessed be He, assuaged His anger on wood and stones, and not on His sons. Similarly, it is written “God has accomplished His fury, He has poured out His fierce anger; and He has kindled a fire in Zion, which hath devoured the foundations thereof.” [Lamentations 4:11]                                                    Midrash Tehillim 79

It is not surprising that the same comment is made both of the Land and of the holiest place therein, for the Land draws its sanctity from the presence within her of the Temple (as per the approach of Maharal).

Concerning the second appellation of the Land, our Sages commented that “the Land of your possession” refers to the Temple. [vaYikra Rabba 17:4]

Thus, both names used in our verse teach the same lesson. 

No Plague Upon Jerusalem Houses

When you come into the land of Canaan which I give you for a possession, and I put a plague of tzara’at in a house of the Land of your possession.                      Leviticus 14:34

The laws of plagues do not apply to the houses of Jerusalem; for it is written “in the Land of your possession” and Jerusalem was not divided among the tribes.

                                Babylonian Talmud, Bava Kamma 82b

Jerusalem does not belong to any of the twelve tribes of Israel, rather to all twelve equally. Thus, as a legal technicality, the laws of tzara’at of a house do not apply in Jerusalem.

Beyond the technicality, Jerusalem’s exemption from the laws of tzara’at of a house presents a moral lesson. Clearly, our Sages understood the role of Jerusalem, indeed its destiny, to be uniting the People of Israel. Thus, the city could not be divided among the tribes, for this would foster disunity. Perhaps the abovementioned halacha is intended to teach that when Jerusalem’s residents allow her to fulfill her destiny there cannot be tzara’at in the Holy City’s houses. Tzara’at results from speaking lashon hara (ill of others), which both reflects and generates disunity. When Jerusalem achieves its ideal of uniting all of Israel, there will no longer be any lashon hara, and hence no tzara’at of houses.

Time as Renewal

And God said to Moses and Aaron in the Land of Egypt, saying:

This month shall be for you the beginning of months, it shall be

the first month of the year.                                    Exodus 12:1,2

Midrash Mechilta comments on “this month shall be for you …”: “Adam did not count (time) this way … which teaches us that Israel counts according to the moon, while the nations of the world count according to the sun”.

Midrash Pesikta d’Rav Kahana has the teaching of Rabbi Levi, who quotes the verse [Leviticus 20:26] “and you shall be holy to Me … and I will distinguish you from the nations”. Rabbi Levi commented: “in all their ways are Israel different from the nations … in their counting and accounting … for the nations of the world count according to the sun, and Israel according to the moon, as it is written ‘This month shall be for you the beginning of months’.”

From Rabbi Levi’s words, one may, perhaps, infer that Israel counts according to the moon specifically in order to distinguish it from the nations of the world.

Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch translates our verse thus: “This renewal of the moon (of Nissan of the year of the exodus, which God showed Moses) shall be unto you the beginning of New Moons (literally, the beginning of renewals, of revivals) …” Rabbi Hirsch notes that the verse conveys two mitzvot:

1] sanctifying the month through seeing the moon in its renewal;

2] establishing the order of the months starting from Nissan, the month of redemption.

Rabbi Hirsch explains that the institution of sanctifying the new month is intended to provide Israel with a regularly recurring opportunity to rejuvenate itself morally and spiritually. This idea is conveyed by our Sages’ comment: “this month is for you – this month is the paradigm for you”. Just as the moon is renewed, so Israel must renew itself.

The nations of the world count time and base their years upon the sun, which is not renewed. Contrary to the nations, Israel’s time and years are measured according to the renewal of the moon.

Clearly, the Torah saw great significance to the symbolism of renewal. Pesaḥ must be in “the month of spring”. In order to insure this, it is necessary to have the institution of leap years. Seemingly, it would have been much simpler for the Torah to establish a solar calendar and thereby obviate the need for leap years. Rather, the Torah wishes to teach us the lesson of the moon’s renewal so we can apply that lesson in our lives.