This is the law of the metzora on the day of his
purification. And he should be brought
to the Kohen. (VaYikra 14:1)
Parshat Tazria discussed the
laws of the metzora. This is a person stricken with tzara’at. The affliction is a result of spiritual failings. The metzora
is ritually unclean. Our pasuk
introduces the discussion of the cleansing and purification process of the metzora. The Chumash explains that the afflicted individual must be
brought to the Kohen. The Kohen
is responsible for the execution of this process.
The commentaries are concerned
with the wording of our passage. The metzora is brought to the Kohen.
The implication is that the Kohen
does not come to the metzora. The metzora
must come to the Kohen.
What is the reason for this
law? In order to answer this question,
we must recall one of the special laws governing the conduct of the metzora. During the period of the affliction, the metzora must live outside of the city or camp. This means that the afflicted person cannot
enter the camp to consult with the Kohen. The Kohen
must leave the city and come to the metzora.
This practical consideration
would seem to require that the Kohen
come to the metzora! What is the meaning of our pasuk?
How can the metzora come to
the Kohen?
Sforno explains that there is
another consideration that is relevant.
The honor of the Kohen must be
respected. Therefore, it is
inappropriate for the Kohen to travel
to the metzora. However, the metzora cannot enter the city!
How are these conflicting considerations resolved? Sforno explains that this is the issue
addressed by the pasuk. The metzora
must approach the city. The Kohen meets the metzora directly outside the boundaries of the camp. This procedure respects the position of the Kohen without compromising the
prohibition against the metzora
entering the city. This is the meaning
of the pasuk. To the extent possible, the metzora must be brought to the Kohen.[1]
Sforno’s explanation is very
interesting. The Chumash is stressing
that the metzora must respect and
honor the Kohen. This implies that the metzora has a special need for this lesson. Why is this message so relevant for the metzora?
Maimonides explains that tzara’at is a punishment for lashon hara – gossip and tale
bearing. He adds that this behavior
ultimately leads to the denigration, by the gossiper, of the righteous.[2] What is the connection between these two
activities?
Perhaps, the righteous are
particularly susceptible to being targeted for lashon hara. What motivates
us to speak lashon hara? Lashon
hara is a means by which we can feel better about ourselves. We denigrate others that we feel are, in
some way, better than ourselves. We are
saying that our target is not really such a good person. We no longer need not feel that we compare
poorly to this person.
We can now identify the reason
that the tzadik is very susceptible
to being targeted. The tzadik challenges our estimation of
ourselves. The behavior of the
righteous gives us cause to recognize our own faults. This occurs through a process of comparison. This can be a painful realization. Some individuals will be tempted to speak lashon hara against the tzadik.
This tactic helps alleviate the pain created by the comparison.
The Kohen is devoted to the service of Hashem. He represents commitment to Torah and
righteous behavior. This status exposes
the Kohen to lashon hara. It is fitting
that, as part of the purification process, the metzora express respect for the Kohen. Perhaps, for this reason the entire process
of identifying tzara’at and
purification is the responsibility of the Kohen. This arrangement forces the metzora to demonstrate humility in the
presence the Kohen.
The Kohen shall then order that for the person undergoing purification
there be taken two live clean birds, a piece of cedar, some crimson thread and
a hyssop branch. (VaYikra 14:4)
This pasuk introduces the purification process for the metzorah. The Chumash describes the purification process in some
detail. The first portion of the
process involves the items listed in our pasuk. One of the two birds is slaughtered. The blood of this bird is mixed with fresh
water. The second bird, along with the
cedar, crimson thread and hyssop are dipped into the mixture of blood and
water. The mixture is sprinkled on the metzorah. The live bird is then released.
It is difficult to determine
the meaning of this process. The
commentaries offer various explanations.
One of the most interesting is provided by Rav Yosef Karo. In order to understand this interpretation,
we need an introduction.
The human being is a
combination of the spiritual and material.
These two elements compete for dominance within the individual. How should a person resolve the conflict
between these elements? There are
various approaches to this issue. Some
religions favor denial of the material element of our nature. If all of humanity would adopt this
approach, humanity would cease to exist.
The instincts provide the motivation for many human endeavors. The obvious example is procreation. Clearly, humanity cannot survive if the
instinctual drives are completely suppressed.
An alternative is to adopt the
opposite extreme. Some individuals
forsake their spiritual element. These
people choose to become completely absorbed in their material desires. This solution to the human conflict is also
ineffectual. First, often these people
feel unfulfilled. It seems we have a
need for spiritual expression. A life
bereft of any spiritual endeavor feels empty and meaningless.
Furthermore, the human being
has the potential to achieve eternal existence. The spiritual element is not extinguished by death. However, this element must be developed
during the period of one's existence in this world. If one does not develop spiritually, the element becomes
atrophied. It cannot survive material
death.
We can now understand Rav Yosef Karo's comments. He explains that the two birds represent the two aspects of the
human being – the spiritual and material.
One bird is slaughtered. This
bird represents the instinctual element.
Complete dominance of this element results in the destruction of the
individual. Happiness in this world is
lost. Eternal existence is forsaken.
The other bird represents the
spiritual element of the human being. This bird is dipped into the blood of the
slaughtered bird. What is the message,
here? One cannot completely ignore the
instinctual element. Instead, the
spiritual person must acknowledge the instinctual element and even indulge this
element to a limited extent. This is
essential for the existence of society and the stability of the
personality. This acknowledgement is
symbolized through the dipping of "spiritual" bird into the blood of
the "material" bird.
The bird is then freed. This act symbolizes the freedom of the
spiritual element to pursue spiritual endeavors. Acknowledging the instinctual element does not damage the
individual's spiritual element. On the
contrary, denial of the instincts is destructive. The healthy individual recognizes the importance of the instincts
and through this recognition attains spiritual freedom.[3] Using this approach Rav Yosef Karo also
explains other elements of the purification process.
Before one begins to search one recites the blessing, “that
sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us on the removal of chametz”… (Shulchan Aruch, Orech Chayim 432:1)
And there are those who observe the custom of placing pieces of chametz in a place that they will be
found. This is in order that the
blessing will not be recited needlessly.
However, if these pieces are not distributed, it does not prevent the
recital of the blessing. This is
because a person’s intention in reciting the blessing is to remove chametz if it is found. (Ibid, Rema 432:2)
On Pesach, leavened substances – chametz – are forbidden. A number of commandments regulate our
interaction with these substances.
These mitzvot prohibit
consumption and possession of chametz. It is prohibited to even benefit from this
forbidden substance. In addition to
these prohibitions, there is a positive command regarding chametz. One must remove
all chametz from one’s possession
prior to Pesach. Two processes are
employed to fulfill this positive command.
First, a thorough search is conducted on the night of the fourteenth of
Nissan – the night prior to Pesach. Any chametz
found during this search is subsequently destroyed. Second, we nullify our ownership of all chametz. This is
accomplished through the pronouncement of a specific legal formula. This formula is recited after the search for
the chametz and repeated after the
destruction of the chametz.
The
search for the chametz fulfills a
positive command to remove the chametz
from our possession. Therefore, it is
preceded by a blessing. This blessing
is described in the above quotation from Shulchan Aruch. Rema – Rav Moshe Isserles – deals with an
interesting problem. It is prohibited
to recite a blessing needlessly. This
blessing is recited prior to fulfilling the commandment to remove chametz from one’s possession. It is possible that the person reciting the
blessing will not find chametz. No chametz
will be removed. If this should occur,
the mitzvah of removing chametz has not been fulfilled. The blessing was recited needlessly.
Rema,
suggests that this consideration led to the development of a popular
custom. Pieces of chametz are placed in a specific place in the house. The search is conducted. At least these pre-placed pieces of chametz are found. This assures that some chametz is removed. The mitzvah is fulfilled. The blessing is not recited needlessly.
It
easy to appreciate the logic of this custom.
It seems to respond to a valid consideration. However, Shulchan Aruch does not require the placement of these
pieces of bread. Furthermore, Rema
explains that there is a basis for Shulchan Aruch’s dismissal of this
issue. He points out that it is not
absolutely necessary to find chametz
in order for the blessing to be recited.
He argues that the meaning of the blessing is determined by the
intention of the person by whom it is recited.
This person does refer to the commandment for the destruction of chametz. However, one's real intention is that we are commanded to destroy
any chametz one may find. Therefore, this objective is fulfilled
regardless of finding actual chametz. This explains the position of Shulchan
Aruch. There is simply no need to
validate the blessing though distributing pieces of bread.
Rema’s
argument is somewhat difficult to understand.
The terms in the blessing are not an expression of personal
thoughts. Our personal interpretation
of the blessing is irrelevant. The blessing refers to a specific
commandment. In order to determine the
meaning of the blessing, we cannot consider a subjective interpretation of one
reciting the blessing. We must analyze
the actual commandment. This blessing
acknowledges the mitzvah to remove chametz from one’s possession. Rema seems to concede that the commandment
requires the actual removal of chametz. If so, the personal interpretation of the
individual reciting the blessing is unimportant! If the mitzvah is
fulfilled, the blessing is valid. This
requires the actual removal of chametz.
An
alternative explanation of Shulchan Aruch’s position can be derived from a
discussion in the mishne. The mishne
raises an interesting question. The
search for chametz seems to ignore a
practical problem. How can the search
actually assure that one’s domain is free of chametz? Assume a person checks
one room of his or her home. This
individual then moves on to another room.
In the interim, prior to completing the inspection of the second room it
cannot be regarded as free of chametz. Any chametz
in that room could be dragged by a mouse to the already inspected room. As a result, it seems impossible to
determine that the house is completely free of chametz. The mishne
responds to this issue. It explains
that we do not concern ourselves with this consideration![4] This is a rather odd response.
How can a valid consideration be dismissed?
This
mishne is conveying a basic concept underlying the process of searching for chametz. The search is not merely a practical means of determining that
the domain is free of chametz. In an absolute sense, this is
impossible. One cannot inspect the
entire domain simultaneously. Even were
this possible, the inspected domain could become contaminated by chametz. This chametz could be
bought into the inspected domain from another home not yet inspected.[5] What then is the value of the search?
The
mishne is telling us that the search is effective because it confers upon the
domain a legal status. Once a room is
inspected this legal status is created.
The room is legally regarded as chametz-free. This legal status exists despite the
possibility of contamination. Halacha can and does chose to disregard
the possibility of contamination. Halacha has the right to determine the
requirement for creating a legal state.
In short, the search is effective because it creates a legal status of chametz-free. It is not effective because it creates an actual practical
assurance.
We
can now understand Shulchan Aruch’s position regarding the blessing over the
search. The search is not merely a
means for finding and removing chametz. The search creates a chametz-free status in the domain.
This suggests an alternative understanding of the mitzvah to remove chametz. We are not actually required to remove all chametz from our domain. The mishne explains that this is virtually
impossible. Instead, we are required to
create a legally chametz-free domain.
The blessing prior to the search acknowledges that we are fulfilling this
commandment. Therefore, it is valid
whether or not chametz is found. It is valid because the mitzvah is not to remove chametz. The mitzvah
is to render one’s domain chametz-free.
This is the bread of affliction that our fathers ate in the land of Egypt. Let all that are hungry come and eat. Let all that so require come and join in the Pesach offering. Now, we are here. Next year, may we be in the land of Israel. Now, we are servants. Next year, may we be free people. (Haggadah of Pesach)
This
short paragraph is recited prior to breaking the matzah at the opening of the Seder. The paragraph contains a number of
elements. It describes the matzah as the bread eaten by our
ancestors during the bondage. It
includes an invitation to others to join in our meal. Finally, in closes with a confirmation of our conviction in the
coming of the Messiah. The Messiah will
come and we will be a free people in the land of Israel.
Rabbaynu
Saadia does not include this paragraph in his Haggadah. He replaces it with a similar
paragraph. Rabbaynu Saadia's version
contains two of the three elements. It
begins with an invitation to join in the Seder. It concludes with the confirmation of our
conviction in the coming of the Messiah.
In
both versions we affirm our conviction in the Messianic era. This conviction is one of the fundamental
principles of Judaism. However, why do
we begin the Seder with this
affirmation?
The
Haggadah indicates that there is an close connection between the redemption
from Egypt and the Messianic era. The
end of the Magid – the portion of the
Haggadah that retells the story of the exodus – we recite the blessing of Ga'al Yisrael. In this berahca we
thank Hashem for redeeming us from Egypt.
We acknowledge that we now celebrate the Seder as a result of this redemption. We then express our wish to soon be able to celebrate the
festivals in the rebuilt holy Temple.
This
blessing indicates that the celebration of Pesach is related to the Messianic
era? What is the relationship?
There
are two basic possibilities. The first
is that the redemption from Egypt is incomplete. We are in exile. Our
affirmation of the Messianic era is a request to the Almighty to hasten the
Messiah's coming. This explanation is
consistent with the formulation of the blessing of Ga'al Yisrael. We begin the
blessing thanking Hashem for our redemption.
We than acknowledge that this redemption is incomplete. We cannot serve the Almighty in the Bait HaMikdash. We pray that Hashem will rebuild the Temple
so we can serve Him more fully.
However,
this interpretation does not explain the affirmation of the Messianic era at
the opening of the Seder. According to this first explanation, we
mention the Messianic era only after recalling our redemption. We are asking Hashem to complete the
redemption. It would not make sense to
affirm our conviction in the Messianic era before we discuss the redemption
from Egypt.
Therefore,
an alternative explanation is needed.
It seems that the through introducing the Seder with an acknowledgement of the Messianic era we are
identifying one of the objectives of the Seder. The purpose of the Seder is not solely to recall our exodus from Egypt. Retelling the story of our redemption serves
another purpose. We are obligated to
fully accept that the Messiah will ultimately arrive. How do we know that there is a basis for this conviction? The redemption from Egypt provides the
proof. The Almighty rescued our
ancestors from slavery. He created a
free nation from an oppressed people. If we accept the truth of these events,
we have a firm basis for our conviction in a second redemption through the
Messiah.
The
order of the Seder expresses this
theme. We begin with an affirmation of
the Messianic era. We then discuss the
basis for our conviction – the redemption from Egypt. We close by articulating the connection. Hashem redeemed us from Egypt. Therefore, we can be sure that He will
redeem us again.
This matzah that we eat – what does it represent? It recalls that the dough of our fathers did not have sufficient time to rise before the King of all Kings – the Holy One Blessed be He – appeared to them and redeemed them; as it is stated, "And they baked the dough that they brought out of Egypt into cakes of matzah. Because it did not rise for the Egyptians chased them out. And they could not delay. And they also did not prepare provisions". (Pesach Haggadah)
The
Haggadah explains the symbolism of matzah. The matzah
recalls the haste of the exodus from Egypt.
The Egyptians were eager for Bnai Yisrael to leave Egypt. They begged the Jews to leave as soon as
possible. The Jews did not have time to
allow their dough to rise properly.
Therefore, the dough baked into unleavened cakes.
The
Haggadah quotes a pasuk from the
Torah that describes the haste of the departure from Egypt and the preparation
of the matzah. The
passage does not refer to the matzah
brought out from Egypt as loaves – lechem. Instead, it calls the matzah "cakes" – ugot. Rashbam explains that the term lechem is not applicable to these matzot.
The term lechem is only used
to describe bread baked in an oven.
These matzot were not placed
in an oven. Instead, the dough was
carried by Bnai Yisrael and baked by the heat of the sun. In order to indicate that these matzot were not baked in an oven the
term ugot is used.[6]
This
raises an interesting question. On
Pesach, we are commanded to eat matzah. Can one fulfill the commandment of eating matzah with sun-baked dough? The Aruch HaShulchan maintains that this
product is unfit for use as matzah. He explains that it is difficult to sun-bake
the dough before it leavens. He ads
that even were leavening avoided, the product would not be suitable for the mitzvah of matzah. This is because matzah is a type of lechem. Lechem is dough processed through the
heat of an oven.[7]
Other
authorities offer an alternative explanation of the term ugot. Their explanation is
based on a comment of Rashi in Tractate Taanit. Rashi explains that the term ugah
– the singular of ugot – means round.[8] These authorities conclude that it is
appropriate to use round matzot for
the mitzvah of matzah.[9]
This
interpretation is difficult to understand.
Why would the Chumash stress the shape of the matzot Bnai Yisrael baked when leaving Egypt? Furthermore, why should we be required to
imitate this characteristic of Bnai Yisrael's matzah?
A
solution to these questions is provided by the pasuk quoted in the Haggadah.
The passage explains that the matzah
symbolize the haste of the departure from Egypt. Bnai Yisrael did not have the time to allow the dough to
rise. Therefore, it baked as unleavened
cakes. This haste also explains the
round shape. The dough was mixed,
kneaded and flattened. The resultant
cake was round. Any other form would
have required shaping. There was no
time to form shaped loaves. We can now
understand the requirement to use round matzot
for the mitzvah of matzah.
Our matzah must reflect the
haste of the departure from Egypt. The matzah is unleavened. This captures the image of haste. However, the round shape adds another
reminder of the haste of the departure.
[1] Rabbaynu Ovadia Sforno, Commentary on Sefer VaYikra 14:2.
[2] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Mishne Torah, Hilchot Tumat Tzara’at, 16:10.
[3] Rav Yosef Karo, Maggid Meysharim (Bar Lev, 1990), p 227.
[4] Mesechet Pesachim 9a.
[5] Mesechet Pesachim 9a.
[6] Rabbaynu Shemuel ben Meir (Rashbam) Commentary on Sefer Shemot 12:39.
[7] Rav Yechiel Michal HaLeyve Epstein, Aruch HaShulchan, Orech Chayim 461:5.
[8] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on the Talmud, Mesechet Taanit 23a.
[9] Rav Yitzchak Mirsky, Haggadat Hegyonai Halacha (Jerusalem, 5755), p 19, note 32.