Undue reticence

 Tazria-Metzorah

Lev. 12:1-15:33

 

Précis: Tazria begins with laws concerning the need for ritual purification of women following the birth of children and the laws of what is usually referred to as “leprosy” of the skin and on garments (although this translation is most certainly erroneous; it appears to refer to an affliction which renders the person, garment, or home ritually impure).

Metzorah discusses laws for the purification of “lepers” with sacrifice and water. It also discusses growths on walls of a house which cause ritual impurity. The parasha concludes with a discussion of bodily secretions which are another source of ritual impurity.

 

Lev.14:34-35 “When you enter the land of Canaan which I gave you as a possession, and I inflict an eruptive plague upon a house in the land you possess, the owner of the house shall come out and tell the priest, saying ‘There is something like a plague which has appeared on my house.’”

As I have previously noted, the reticence of the priest to make the statement in this verse is strange for a Torah which has little difficulty in defining what is and is not appropriate.  “Something like a plague” is unusually tentative language! The Sages of the Mishnah, stated that “Even if he is a Torah scholar and knows for certainty that it is a plague-spot, he shall not declare outright, ‘It is a plague-spot,’ but rather ‘Something like a plague-spot.’”

The reticence can be understood on several levels. We do not want to “make a scene.” We do not want to impugn the integrity of another explicitly. We want to assume that every individual is good.

But this reticence also can stand in the way of criticism which is needed and merited. To remain silent or tentative in the face of a plague cannot be right, be it a plague of disease, of intolerance, of hate, of bigotry, or of totalitarianism.

Unto the 4th Generation

 

When Shabbat occurs on Chol HaMoed of Passover, Ex. 33:12–34:26 is read. Included in these verses are the story of the Golden Calf, Moses’ smashing the first set of tablets, his return up the mountain where he carves a second set. While at his labor, Moses learns the 13 attributed of God. “… ‘Adonai! Adonai! a God compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in kindness and faithfulness, extending kindness to the thousandth generation, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin—yet not remitting all punishment, but visiting the iniquity of parents upon children and children’s children, upon the third and fourth generations (Ex. 34:6-7).”

These are most familiar to us from the services on Yom Kippur, when these words are chanted repeatedly, and as the day comes to an end, with increasing fervor. But there is an important difference. Our Yom Kippur Machzor usually ends with the positive statement of forgiving sin to the thousandth generation. Yet the entirety of the 13 attributes included the fact that God is a God of justice, who does not remit all punishment, even to the fourth generation. How can we explain this?

It does seem injudicious to punish children for the sins of their parents, let alone their great-great-great grandparents! Our tradition does suggest that there is a lesson for those of us still alive. As Richard Elliot Friedman notes in his commentary, the fourth generation is outside of the span we encounter in life. While unusual, it is not unheard of for one to live while one’s great-great parent still lives. But yet another generation? Friedman suggests that the consequences of iniquity may last as long as the lives of those who might be alive when the sin was committed.

There is another rationale. Some commentators suggest that the punishment continues to the fourth generation only if each generation inspires the subsequent generation to the same errors. Thus, the idea of the parent as a role model is ancient indeed. None of us are without sin, yet we all have the ability to repent and display appropriate behavior to those who follow us.