THIS SHALL BE THE LAW OF THE

PERSON AFFLICTED WITH LEPROSY, ON THE DAY OF HIS CLEANSING: HE SHALL BE BROUGHT

TO THE PRIEST.

THE PRIEST SHALL GO OUTSIDE THE

CAMP, AND THE PRIEST SHALL LOOK, AND BEHOLD, THE LESION OF LEPROSY HAS HEALED

IN THE AFFLICTED PERSON.

 THEN THE PRIEST SHALL ORDER, AND THE PERSON TO

BE CLEANSED SHALL TAKE TWO LIVE, CLEAN BIRDS, A CEDAR STICK, A STRIP OF CRIMSON

(Vayikra

14:2-4)

The tree which Haman

prepared for Mordechai was a cedar

The Sages said: Haman cast lots

over a cedar tree. He cast them over a grape-vine, but he did not succeed. He

said, "Israel is

compared to the grape-vine, for it is said, You

plucked up a vine from Egypt

(Psalms 80:9)." He cast them over an olive tree, but

he did not succeed, for Israel were compared to it, for it is said, the Lord

named you verdant olive tree, fair with choice fruit (Jeremiah 11:16). He cast them over the apple but did not

succeed, for Israel

was compared to it, for it is said I aroused you under the apple-tree (Song of Songs 8:5). He cast them over the pomegranate but did

not succeed, for Israel

were compared to it, for it is said if the pomegranates are in bloom (6:11) like a split pomegranate (4:3). He cast them over the date-palm but did

not succeed, for Hananiah, Mishael

and Azariah were compared to it, for it is said, I

said I shall ascend the date-palm (7:9).

He cast them over the nut-tree but did not succeed, for the congregation of Israel

were compared to it, for it is said, I went down into the garden of nuts

(6:11). He cast them over the myrtle, the willow,

and the citron, but he did not succeed, for they plead Israel's case and ask

mercy for them, for it is said, and you shall take for yourselves on the

first day, etc. (Vayikra 23:40). He cast them over the reed, but the Holy One blessed be He told him: "Fool! Israel are

compared to the reed which stands its ground in the water, moving with every

wind. Even though water is bad for the reed it stands its ground. It is not

compared to the cedar, which can be broken by the wind, and idolaters were

compared to it, for it is said, Behold, Ashur

is a cedar in Lebanon

(Ezekiel 31:3). But regarding Israel it is written, it sways

like a reed in water (I Kings 14:15). See – the

cedar has been prepared for you since the six days of creation – on

the tree which he prepared for him (Esther 6:4).

(Yalkut Shimoni Esther 1054)

Clean [birds] Excluding an unclean

bird. Because lesions of leprosy come as a result of

derogatory speech, which is done by chattering. Therefore, for his

cleansing, this person is required to bring birds, which twitter

constantly with chirping sounds.

a cedar stick Because lesions [of leprosy] come because

of haughtiness.

A strip of crimson [wool], and hyssop What is the remedy

that he may be healed [of his leprosy]? He must humble himself from his

haughtiness, just as [symbolized by] the tola'at

dye was extracted to color wool], and the [lowly] hyssop.

(Rashi Vayikra 14:4, Judaica Press translation)

The Old Shall be Renewed and the New

Shall be Sanctified (HaRAYaH Kook)

Dalia Marx

The parashiyot we

read this week, as well as the new scandals of corruption and bribery that are

revealed in our country on a daily basis, require us to deal with the afflictions

of the nation. Perhaps this is precisely the time to take account of our positive

achievements.

Even in these troubled times, I think

everyone would agree that there is one area in which Zionism's success has not

only been unquestionable – it has exceeded all expectations. I refer, of

course, to the revival of Hebrew as a spoken and living language. The

efforts of other cultures to follow the example of Hebrew's champions and revive

their own ancient languages have been greeted with failure. As a result, many

view the revival of Hebrew as a kind of miracle.

The parashiyot we

read today offer us an opportunity to observe one of the central mechanisms of

Hebrew's rebirth – the novel employment of grammatical schemas and roots that

already exist in the language in order to express new meanings. Let us inspect

a few examples:

In the course of discussing various

afflictions and the methods of their purification, parashat

Tazria lists a number of diseases and bodily

conditions: baheret ["white discoloration"] (13:4), tzarevet ["scar"]

(13:23), sapahat ["swelling"](13:2), tzara'at ["leprosy"], karahat ["baldness of the top of the head"]

(13:42), gabahat ["baldness of the sides of the head"]

(13:42). These terms all share a common grammatical

form: although some of the words vary from it

slightly due to the presence of a guttural stop.

When spoken Hebrew awoke to life in the end

of the nineteenth century it needed new words to describe new diseases. Rabbi Aharon Meir MaZIA, an ophthalmologist

and aboriculturalist who chaired the Language

Committee (which eventually became the Academy for the Hebrew Language) from

1926 until his death in 1930, composed a lexicon of medical and scientific

terms.

In order to invent names for diseases that

were never mentioned in classical Hebrew sources, MaZIA

and others following him used the biblical form for disease names – ,

a form exemplified repeatedly in our parashiyot – in combination

with new roots. For instance; rubella, a disease that causes redness of the

skin, is called ademet

[adom

= red]. Hepatitis, which causes the eyes to acquire a yellow hue (we will come

soon to Hebrew's new color-terms), is called tzahevet [tzahov = yellow]. Edema, the

pathological retention of fluids in the body, is called batzeket [batzek = swollen]. Rabies, a viral

disease often found in dogs is called kalevet [kelev = dog]. One who coughs [mishta'el] may be suffering from sha'elet [pertusis]. The term influenza originates from

reference to the occult influence [hashpa'a]

of the stars, and so it is called shapa'at. Many suffer tiredness [ayeifut]

from jet-lag, or

ya'efet, one of the more recent words to be

invented by the Academy of the Hebrew Language.

Sometimes it took a while for a word to

really enter the language; some never make it at all. For example, Eliezer Ben Yehudah, the greatest

reviver of Hebrew, wished to call tuberculosis (a disease from which he personally

suffered) genihat hadam ["groaning of the blood"], but the

term shahefet

– which follows the standard form for disease-names and is of biblical origin –

ended up taking its place.

The vitality of Hebrew is evidenced by the

way names for social ills are invented in accordance with the schema mentioned

above. For instance: sahevet [taking

too much time to execute an action, from sahev

= to drag or carry with effort] and sagemet

[megalomania of young

officers, from sagam = second lieutenant]. Many

public speakers are chronic suffers of daberet [loquaciousness, from dibbur

= speech], or worse yet, barberet [speaking nonsense, from levarber = to babble].

So much for diseases. May we all enjoy good health!

The schema for color terms is another

grammatical form found repeatedly in our parshiyot which

has been resurrected in the period of Hebrew's renaissance. Scripture lists

many shades of red (argevan, argeman, shani, po'eh, etc.), but many other colors are conspicuous

in their absence, such as the colors of the sky and the sea. This linguistic lacuna

brought one nineteenth century European philologist to speculate that the

ancient Semitic peoples may have not been able to discern the "radiant

colors."

The writer, educator, and historian Rabbi

Ze'ev Yavetz

(1847-1924), who, too, was a member of the Language Committee, employed the

schema to fill this

lexical gap. This grammatical form is frequently the basis for the terms used

to describe the colors associated with different afflictions and diseases in

our parashiyot: tzahov

(13:30) and shahor (13:31). Elsewhere we find adom (Bereishit 25:30) and yarok (Job 39:8). Yavetz used the schema

to create two new color-terms,

which, years later, would come to symbolize the range of Israeli political

discourse: katom [orange] and kahol [blue].

Rabbi Yavetz's

nephew, David Yellin, who was also involved in

reviving the language, wrote of his matter:

In

my conversation with my uncle, the Rabbi, Gaon, and

wonderful researcher, Rabbi Ze'ev Yavetz,

may his lamp give light, told me that he wants to fill the gap in our language

in connection with the names for light blue [tekhelet]

and the color of egg-yolk, for in his opinion kahol

is the first color, as Midrash Rabbah

(Bamidbar Rabbah 2:7) states that sapphire is "bluish black"

and there is no color close to black besides it and the ketem

of scripture (see,

for example, Lamentations 4:6)

– it seems to him that they used it to describe the color "gold" and

not gold itself…I have found support for his views in the Arabic language,

which uses the word kuh'l to describe the

cloudless sky which is purely tekhelet. Ketem in the hitpa'el form

means in Arabic: "It appeared with the color of egg-yolk." Now we can

say kahol and katom

in the same way that we say adom and yarok. (David Yellin, HaTzvi, 11 Sivan 5647, quoted by Reuven

Sivan in "Mi'Hayey ha'Milim",

Leshoneinu la'Am

18 (5727), pg. 3)

The color of the flower sigalit

renewed and renamed sagol. The

color of efer [ashes] was named afor [grey], and the color of the rose [vered]

was now called varod.

Eliezer Ben Yehudah's second

wife, Hemda, was a fashion critic (and inventor of

the Hebrew word for fashion, ofna). She

described a social event that took place in the year 1900 with these words: "The

women in colorful garb, white, pink [varod]

and tekhelet, with flowers on their chests"

(Hashkafa 12 Iyyar, 5660,

quoted by Reuven Sivan in "Mi'Hayey

ha'Milim", Leshoneinu

la'Am 23 (5733), pg. 209). In this way she helped to acculturate the

name of the favorite color of today's young daughters of Zion.

In parashat Tazria we find another schema for color-names: yerakrak and adamdam (it is interesting to mention that yerakrak seems to have been used to refer to the

color yellow – see Psalms 68:14. Yalkut Shimoni Esther 1053 says that "Esther was yerakroket and a strand of grace was drawn upon her."

The point is not that her face was drained of blood due to anger or jealousy,

but rather that she was a blond.) The renewers of Hebrew were unsure whether this schema implies emphasis, and

thus refers to a stronger shade, or whether it refers to a more delicate

shade. They decided to accept the latter interpretation, and invented the terms

tzehavhav

God commanded Noah, tzei

min ha'teiva [take leave of the ark]. Sometimes

we must take leave of the teiva [in this

instance meaning "the word"], in order to find a creative solution. We

have seen how biblical words inspired the coining of new terms for diseases and

colors that were not present in classical Hebrew and which were needed by

Modern Hebrew.

The Sages understood the word metzora [leper] as containing the words motzi [shem]

ra ["one brings forth an evil name,"

i.e., a defamer]. From this they concluded that leprosy is caused by social

ills such as gossip (see, for example Vayikra Rabba

16:2-6). In the present

article, we have seen examples of the bringing forth of good, new names – names

that are evidence of social well-being.

One of the principles that guided those who

revived the classical language may be expressed by HaRa'AYaH

Kook's formulation: "The old shall be renewed and the new shall be

sanctified." Preference is given to neologisms that pour new nectar into

old bottles, new combinations that instill Hebrew's ancient grammatical schemas

and roots with new meanings – as we have seen in the examples of disease-names

cited above – rather than to completely ex-nihilo linguistic creations.

This connection to early linguistic traditions

can serve as a model for cultural continuity in a tradition experiencing renewal.

May we derive goodly names from our ancient, living tongue! May these names be

sweet in our mouths and in our hearts so that they may guide us and our leaders

to choose the good and to do the good!

Dr. Dalia Marx teaches at Hebrew Union

College and at the Hebrew University

in Jerusalem.

Thoughts on Independence 5767

The story is told of a Jew who wanted to

test himself to see if he was clever or gullible. He thought that the best way

to do this was to throw himself down the stairs in his home and then notice whether

he was injured or remained unharmed. After all, it says the Lord protects

the gullible!

So, according to plan, he threw himself all

the way down the staircase, sustaining injuries from head to feet, including

broken limbs, a fractured skull, and unbearable pain. After recuperating from

the many operations he had to undergo, he told his visitors: "I knew that

I was clever, but not so very clever…"

Rational Zionism sought to "normalize"

the Jewish People. Indeed, in the State of Israel the Jewish People became "normal"

– but why so very "normal"!?! Bialik's

vision of a "Hebrew thief", etc. has been completely realized. Perhaps

even Bialik would not imagine a situation in which

there is hardly a single person serving in a public position who is not being

investigated for corruption or some other offense. Many years ago I knew a Jew

who, in his old age, moved to retirement home which he called a "one star

hotel" because the clouds hid the other stars.

I think that many "clouds"

interfere with our ability to celebrate Independence Day this year. We emerged

scarred from a war that seems to have been executed irresponsibly from beginning

to end. Many young lives were lost in that war and it is entirely unclear what

it achieved. The gap between rich and poor grows daily. It is unclear if our

leaders have any plan or direction at all. Perhaps they are so busy with being investigated

and trying to survive that they have no time left for the country's needs. Such

situations can bring reasonable people to ask themselves: What good is

rejoicing?

Is this "the child we prayed for"?

When they asked Prof. Leibowitz

if the State was a disappointment for him, he answered that he was not

disappointed by it all – even though he was thoroughly opposed to its

character. He had never had any expectations from it besides the single one it

had fulfilled: the return of political and governmental independence to the

Jewish People. The significance of the State for the people is like that of

health for the individual: it must be achieved and protected, but the struggle

for "values" – and the struggle for "holiness" all the more

so – is beyond them (Ratziti li'shol

otkha, Prof Leibowitz,

pg. 378).

Should we, as religious Zionists, be

satisfied with this minimalist expectation? Can its fulfillment serve as a

source of joy, despite the many clouds that mar the State's accomplishments in

many areas? True, the answer to this question is not simple, but I think that

while Leibowitz's answer sounds too cynical and

pessimistic, it expresses a deep Jewish truth. The Mishnah

in Berakhot 9:5 states: "One is required to say

a blessing over the bad just as one says a blessing over the good." The Gemara (Berakhot 60b) asks: But the blessings are not identical! Over the good one says the

blessing, "He who is good and is beneficent" and over the bad, "Blessed

is the true Judge"! Rava offers a bewildering

answer to this question: "One is only required to accept it joyfully."

Rava's "solution" seems only to pose an

even greater quandary; can people be expected to say a blessing over the bad "joyfully"?!

I think that Rashi

can help us understand the nature of the joy required in such occasions. He

explains Rava's answer with two words: b'levav shalem ["full-heartedly"].

We may assume that Rashi knew Hebrew perfectly well

and could have written b'lev shalem, but he chose to write b'levav

shalem. He seems to be sending us back to a derasha brought by the Mishnah: b'khol levavkha

with all your heart [lev =

"heart" appearing in the doubled form levav]

– with both your inclinations. One who is called upon to make a blessing

over the bad is conflicted. On the one hand, he cannot deny his true feelings

and he is not even asked to do so. On the other hand, he must "bend his

knee" before God's will and "say the blessing." Therefore, this

blessing contains the required complexity.

Perhaps our joy over the independent state

is a mixed joy: the questions are difficult and legitimate – but that should

not keep us from blessing and giving thanks b'levav

shalem for the gift we were given 59 years ago or

from hoping that the possibilities offered by the existence of the state can

still be realized. Happy Independence Day.

Pinchas Leiser,

Editor

If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards

its publication and distribution.

• Hebrew edition distributed in Israel

  $700

• English edition distributed via email $

  100

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc. Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to

appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in advance to appear in the English email.

In Israel, checks made out to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz VeShalom-P.O.B.

4433, Jerusalem

91043. Unfortunately there is no Israeli tax-exemption for local donations.

US and British tax-exempt contributions to Oz VeShalom may be made through:

New Israel Fund, POB

91588, Washington, DC 20090-1588,

USA

New Israel Fund of Great Britain, 26 Enford Street, London W1H 2DD, Great

Britain

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE NEW ISRAEL

FUND IS NO LONGER ACCEPTING DONATIONS UNDER $100.

PEF will also channel donations and provide a tax-exemption. Donations

should be sent to P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317 Madison Ave., Suite 607, New

York, New York 10017 USA

All contributions should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project.

About us

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement

dedicated to the advancement of a civil society in Israel. It is committed to

promoting the ideals of tolerance, pluralism, and justice, concepts that have

always been central to Jewish tradition and law.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep

attachment to the land

of Israel and it no less

views peace as a central religious value. It believes that Jews have both the

religious and the national obligation to support the pursuit of peace. It

maintains that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a fair and just

society, and that co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an option but an

imperative.

5,000 copies of a 4 page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah

reading are written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot

Shalom and they are distributed to over 350 synagogues in Israel and are

sent overseas via email. Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il.