Aside from dealing with the purification
rites of a post birth woman, the beginning part of Parashat Tazri'a also
touches on the eighth day circumcision (see 12:3). Last week's Parasha was
called "Shmini," meaning "eighth." And while the bulk of Parashat “Tazri'a”
deals with regulations of "tzarat" (leprosy and other skin
conditions), it is the next Parasha which bears the name of the leper
("Me'tzorah"). Thus, even when there appears to be no
connection between two successive Parashot (plural of Parasha), one is often
threaded into the other (even if it is only by a very thin cord). That,
however, will be not true of (next week's) Parashat Me'tzorah, which forms a
sequel to this present one and is therefore very closely related to it.
"If a woman conceives seed [literal
translation] and gives birth to a male child, then she shall be unclean seven
days…" (12:2). "Conceives seed" is "tazri'a,"
being the name of our Parasha, is a very unusual form for "becoming pregnant,"
since its root word "zera" - z.r.a. - (zayin, resh, ayin) is "seed"
or "semen" (and by implication also "offspring").
S.R. Hirsch translates it: "When a woman has matured a human germ…"
and goes on to comment: "Germ, basically the seed of plants and hence
herb-yielding seed (Gen. 1:11), the seed-forming activity of plants for the
continuation of their species, when applied to human beings is the usual term
for the offspring by which Man continues his generation. By the use of the expression "tazri'a"
here, which only occurs in B’resheet 1:11 and 12, referring to the activity of
plants for the continuation of their species, the mother's role in producing
progeny is looked at in the purely material physical character of its
physiological process, and with that one word the whole idea of the uncleanness
spoken of here is shown."][1][
In this manner Hirsch also provides one of several answers supplied to the
question, "Why should a mother be declared 'unclean' for fulfilling a
Divinely-ordained mission?" The sages especially question the need for a
sin offering. ][2][ The expression "tazri'a," however,
brings to mind not only B’resheet 1:11 and 12, as Hirsch points out, but is
also reminiscent of the usage of the term "zera," “seed” in B’resheet
3:15, where there is reference to the "Seed of the woman" Who is
destined to crush the head of the serpent see also Gal. 3:16). Thus, by one
word the “purely material physical character” of birth is brought out, and at
the same time, in a contrasting manner, an allusion is made to the future “Seed
of Woman” who will remove the sin inherent in every child born. The seven
initial days of the woman's "impurity" mentioned, are linked here to
the week of impurity during the menstrual cycle (“as in the days of her
customary impurity.” See also Lev. 15:19). The numbers of days of impurity,
upon the birth of a daughter, are to be twice as many as these days upon the
birth of a son. The reason for this appears to be that, this daughter will also
be “impure” during her menstrual cycle and when she gives birth.
"When the days of her purification are fulfilled,
whether for a son or a daughter, she shall bring to the priest a lamb of the
first year as a burnt offering, and a young pigeon or a turtledove as a sin
offering, to the door of the tabernacle of meeting" (12:6). The burnt
offering, according to some of the sages, was a token of thankfulness to the
Almighty for having preserved her through the labor pains and hazards, and for
having been granted the strength to bear a child. "The new life within her
made [the mother] deeply conscious of the greatness of the creator, as also of
her insignificance as 'dust and ashes' and impurity; hence the need for a
sin-offering."][3][
The sin offering may be linked to the fact that we are
"brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me" (Ps.
51:5), as expressed by David, who was not singling out his own mother as a
sinner for having conceived him, but was emphasizing the fact that man's
inherent sin nature is hereditary and simply passes through the blood line. The
fact that it is transmitted from generation to generation is illustrated by
what we have already observed, that contained in man is the seed for the
perpetuity of his (sinful) race, and thus the fruit will resemble the parent
plant. The unusual usage of "tazri'a" could therefore be the
clue to unraveling the 'mystery' of the mother's "impurity" after
giving birth, and the requirement of a sin offering. Incidentally, Miriam,
Yeshua's mother, did likewise (ref. Luke 2:22-24), even though her son's
conception had been totally different. In this case, following the Torah ruling
was most likely performed in the same vein as Yeshua's immersion, which was for
the purpose of "fulfilling all righteousness" (Mat. 3:15). The usage
of "seed" in connection to bearing an offspring, therefore,
underscores the heredity nature of sinfulness. Thus, the "Seed of the
woman" is a reminder that the sinless Seed will likewise be propagated
after His own kind.
In one breath with the birth of "a male,"
mention is also made of the eighth day’s circumcision. When we reviewed last week’s Parashat Shmini mention was made of
the significance of the figure “eight” which stems from the root sh.m.n,
being the root for “fat” (hence “oil - shemen"), following
the fullness of seven ("sheva"), thereby indicating an overabundance
(at times with negative connotations, such as "and Yeshurun waxed fat…"
Deut. 32:15, emphasis added). The eighth day circumcision also indicates that
it takes precedence over Shabbat, and a child who is born on Friday,
notwithstanding, will be circumcised on the following day (on Shabbat that is).
Take note, in this respect, of the connection between the “seventh day” and the
“eighth.”
The next part of the Parasha (chapter 13) is also
devoted to issues of purity and impurity, this time related to skin diseases,
as well as to contaminated houses and clothes. Since dealing with this variety
of conditions was up to the priests' discernment, they are the ones mentioned,
and it is therefore Aha’ron who is addressed here (whereas he was not mentioned
in the first part of the Parasha). The various conditions described and
elaborated upon all come under the general heading of "tza'ra'at"
(tz.r.a, tzadi, resh, ayin). Another
word which stems from the same root is "tzir'ah", meaning “hornet”.
Both "tza'ra'at" and
"tzir'ah" appear to be used symbolically, as we see for
example in Shmot (Exodus) 23:28: "And I
will send hornets before you, which shall drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite,
and the Hittite from before you" (for a similar reference to hornets refer
to Deut. 7:20 and Josh. 24:12).
The root tz.r.a means “project outward.”
If the sins that were committed (and resulted in this affliction), were mostly
done in secret then this condition will have revealed them, whether on one’s
body, clothing or home. Doesn’t this illustrate our lives too? We may think,
contemplate or even say something secretly, thinking that we can cover up iniquity.
However, we cannot hid from YHVH, not to mention the fact that affliction of
one form or another is “built into” the very action of sin, especially as it
affects our bodies. Anything which is not of the nature of the One who indwells
us is constituted sin, and thus, by not being conformed to His new life we bring
on ourselves plagues and malaise, and every form of dis-ease.
The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius
Lexicon defines the root verb "tza'ro'a" as "to throw down,
prostrate, humble oneself"][4][.
The various forms of "tzara'at" certainly placed the one declared as
contaminated in a humbling, if not a humiliating state, as described in 13:45, 46:
"Now the leper on whom the sore is, his
clothes shall be torn and his head bare; and he shall cover his mustache, and
cry, `Unclean! Unclean!' He shall be unclean. All the days he has the sore he
shall be unclean. He is unclean, and he shall dwell alone; his dwelling shall
be outside the camp." The word for "unclean" is
"tameh" (t.m.a, tet, mem, alef) with its literal meaning being
"ritually polluted."
The concept, "outside the camp," like many
others in Scripture, is twofold. Whereas here the "tameh" is
separated from the community, in Shmot (Exodus) 33:7, after the Golden Calf
episode we read: "Moses took his tent and pitched it outside the camp, far
from the camp, and called it the tabernacle of meeting. And it came to pass
that everyone who sought YHVH went out to the tabernacle of meeting which was outside
the camp" (italics added). Likewise, in Hebrews 13:12-13:
"Therefore Yeshua also, that He might sanctify the people with His own
blood, suffered outside the gate. Therefore let us go forth to Him, outside the
camp, bearing His reproach." The paradox of “separation outside the camp”
because of sin versus the set apart place “outside the camp” may be compared to
another irony in our Parasha. The characteristic of tza’ra’at (a sin related
condition) is the skin’s discoloration, turning it white, while in Yisha’ya’hu
1:19 it says: “though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as
snow,” in this case “whiteness” marks purity.
The latter part of chapter 13 deals with “tzra’at” as it
contaminates leather or cloths (v. 47-59). In this connection it refers to wool
in the last verse of the Parasha (13:59): “the leprous plague in a garment of
wool,” while the second part of Isaiah 1:19 says: “though they [the sins] are
red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” In this case “wool” implies
“whiteness” or “purity.” Several times
mention is made of “sh’ti va’erev,”
that is, the “warp and woof” of the cloth (the threads woven lengthwise and
crosswise). The woof which is threaded through the warp is thought of as being
“mixed in” and is therefore designated by the well known term
“erev” (ayin, resh, vet), a term we have been following in many instances, but
primarily in the word for “evening,” which is a state of light being mixed
with darkness.
Nechama Leibowitz concludes: "According to most
commentators tzara'at is not a common disease, but supernatural infliction by
Divine Providence through which man is reminded of his sinful ways, and called
upon to abandon them". The appended footnote says: "It is noteworthy
that medical research fails to associate the Biblical tzara'at with any known
disease. Its diagnosis as leprosy is rejected by modern medicine." She also
points out that plagues in general had a special role as warning signs against
sinful behavior [5], or were its consequences (e.g. 2nd Sam. 24:1,
15; and 2nd Chro. 26:16-21, where the plague mentioned is
“tza’ra’at”).
[[1] ] New Studies in Vayikra Part 1, Nechama Leibowitz,
trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner
Library,
Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed Books
Inc.,
]2[ Ibid
]3[ Ibid
]4[
The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius
Lexicon, Francis Brown Hendrickson,
Publishers Peabody , Mass.
]5[ New
Studies
No comments:
Post a Comment