The religious

establishment has struggled to shape the religious character of Yom Ha'atzmaut

and Yom Yerushalayim, and this issue continues to engage various sectors of the

religious community. It cannot be solved without coming to an understanding of

the religious value of the historical events associated with those holidays.

Let it be said at the outset: we are not concerned here with the significance

of a "prophetic vision" or "messianic destiny" involving

"the Kingdom of Israel." Rather, we must investigate the significance

of the political creation of the actual State of Israel, which came into

existence in 1948, and the significance of the manner and conditions of its

creation, its wars and conquests. The religious attitudes towards these days

can only be based upon historical understanding, and not upon study of the

halakhic tradition, which never contemplated such situations. We are not free

to shrug off our responsibility to decide this matter ourselves. In a world and

a generation in which the finger of God was not seen or recognized, in which

the Messiah's footprints were not to be found, in a generation of God's

"hiding His face" – for Israel, for the nations, and for the entire

world – in such a generation of material and spiritual darkness, we took the

bold initiative – with our little bit of understanding and righteousness – to

redeem ourselves from the yoke of the nations. We have no communication with

that which is "behind the curtain," and we received from there no

indication that this is "the first flowering of our redemption." Therefore,

we must – we are obliged to – solve the new religious issues for ourselves;

issues which we ourselves have created.

 (Y. Leibowitz: Yahadut, Am Yisrael UMdeinat Yisrael, pp. 90-91)

…with independence we

gained control of ourselves, we achieved freedom of choice. We are not

dependent upon others, and the process of redemption can be carried out to its

completion, if so we please.

Redemption is not one of the 613 commandments, and the halakhic

meaning of the Redemption lies in political independence, in the possibility of

observing those commandments which require sovereignty and territoriality in

the Land of Israel. The beginning of the redemption is the possibility of

observing the commandments through the sovereignty granted us. The Redemption

itself is the actual observance of the commandments.

 (Dov Rappel: Pithei She'arim, p. 213)

"The afflicted house never existed and never shall exist.

Why was it written about?

Expound upon it and receive a reward."

Pinchas Leiser

The

expression derosh vekabel sakhar – "Expound upon it and receive a

reward" – occurs several times in various contexts within rabbinic

literature. Bavli Sota 44a mentions it while treating Proverbs 24:27. There the

Sages set out the correct progression for Torah study: one should first study

Scripture, then Mishnah and Gemara and perform good deeds and later he can

explicate and receive a reward." This drasha may intend to tell us that

one should first build his cultural, spiritual, and social foundation before

becoming able to be creative and make his own personal mark.

The

Sages also use this expression in reference to items that have no contemporary

halakhic application (death penalties, sacrifices) or that they claim

"never existed and shall never exist," such as the rebellious son [ben

sorer umoreh] and the ir hanidahat – the condemned town.

Nega'ei ha'bayit

commentators ever since the Sages wondered about the phenomenon's strangeness.

Rashi chose to interpret the matter midrashically, and understood the

nega'ei habayit as constituting a kind of blessing. He wrote:

And

I inflict an eruptive affliction – This was an announcement to them that

these plagues would come upon them, because the Amorites concealed treasures of

gold in the walls of their houses during the whole 40 years the Israelites were

in the wilderness, and in consequence of the nega they would pull down

the house and discover them [the treasures]. (Based

on Silberman translation)

Hizkuni cites the words

of the Tosafot which claim that the nega'ei ha'bayit marked the houses

in which idols had been worshipped, so that the Israelites would know which

buildings had to be destroyed.

Sanhedrin 71a offers

the most radical interpretation of nega'ei habayit. This appears in the context

of a discussion of those commandments which appear in the Torah, but which lack

practical application – commandments meant to serve as objects of purely

theoretical interest to be "studied in order to receive a reward [from

heaven]." Regarding the nega'ei ha'bayit the Talmud there states:

There never was and never will be an afflicted house. And

why is it written? Expound upon [it] and receive a reward.

Indeed, the Gemara does

present us with other interpretations and even testimony supporting the

existence of afflicted houses, but the author of the discussion grants ample

space to those who hold that the ben sorer umoreh [disobedient child],

the ir ha'nidahat [city which turned to idolatry], and the afflicted

house all "never existed nor will ever exist in the future" and were

mentioned in the Torah only in order to afford people the opportunity to

"expound upon [them] and receive a reward."

What, then, is there to

be expounded upon in this matter? We find two apparently contradictory

approaches regarding the possibility of houses in Jerusalem being afflicted:

The Gemara in Yoma 12a

says that Jerusalem – and certainly the area of the Temple – cannot suffer

afflictions, since they are not included in the category of your possessions,

in accordance with the view holding that "Jerusalem was not divided among

the tribes." Contrastingly, in Vayikra Rabbah 17:7, we read:

And

I shall inflict an eruptive affliction upon a house in the land you possess – This

refers to the Temple, for it is said, I am going to desecrate My Sanctuary,

your pride and glory (Ezekiel 24:21).

Of course, it is

possible to reconcile the two statements by pointing out that the quote from

Yoma is halakhic, while that from Vayikra Rabbah is a midrash aggadah

meant to express a theological idea. The midrash even continues along the

metaphorical thread that it had begun:

The

owner of the house shall come (Vayikra

14:35) – That is the Holy One Blessed be He, for it is said, because

of My House which lies in ruins (Haggai 1:9)

And

tell the priest (Vayikra, loc cit) – That

is Jeremiah, for it is said [that he was one] of the priests that are in

Anatot (Jeremiah 1:1).

Something

like an affliction has appeared upon my house (Vayikra,

loc cit) – That is the filth of idolatry. Some say: That is Menashe's

idol.

It seems to me, however, that both the

midrash and the Talmudic statement may be read in a different way since, in any

event, this halakhah has no practical application, and halakhah may also be

interpreted on the philosophical level.

In his comments on the

verse from Vayikra, Rabbi S. R. Hirsch explains that on the one hand, the

afflictions only occur in the Land of Israel, while, on the other hand, they

only occur in the land you possess, i.e., in houses belonging to known

individuals. Thus, at the ideal level, Jerusalem and the Temple "cannot be

made impure with afflictions."

The affliction is,

therefore, a social affliction connected with the consequences of the

acquisitiveness that can arise from private ownership.

If so, there is an

essential contradiction between ownership and holiness. The holy is set apart

and cannot be included in any kind of real estate holding or sovereignty. There

is also an opinion (Yoma 12a) that

Jerusalem was not apportioned to the tribes, and a beraita is cited stating

that, "Houses are not rented in Jerusalem, because they do not belong to

them." These dicta strengthen the philosophical view that finds ownership

and holiness to be mutually incompatible. Therefore, the afflictions can

damage the Temple when the attitude towards it is acquisitive – an acquisitive

attitude necessarily defiles the holy.

This affliction is remedied

by emptying the house, placing it under quarantine, removing of the affected

stones (idolatry), dispersing them to an unclean place, and replacing them with

other stones.

I do not think there is

need to write at length in order to make understood the meaning of these ideas

for today. The creation of the State of Israel sets before us many important

challenges. We can be able, if we so wish, to build in our hearts and in our

society a place for the Temple, where our lives will be sanctified and our

society built upon a solid foundation of justice. No material stones are

needed, but rather the construction of a society that seeks peace, cares for

the stranger, for the orphan and for the widow. It may be that in order to

achieve this we will have to substitute afflicted stones with other stones, but

in order to preserve the house's future, we must expound upon the laws of nega'ei

habayit, and find a way to apply them.

Zion shall be

redeemed with justice and those returning to her with righteousness.

Pinchas Leiser, the editor of Shabbat Shalom, is a psychologist.

Tzara'at ["Leprosy"]: a Physical or a

Spiritual Disease?

And if the garment is inflicted with leprosy: This does not

occur at all in nature nor does it exist in the world, and so it is with the

blemishes of houses as well. However, when Israel is perfectly for God, the

Lord's spirit will be constantly be upon them to give their bodies, clothing,

and homes a comely appearance, and if one of them commits a sin or crime then their

flesh or clothing or home will be made ugly in order to show that the Lord has

departed from him. That is why Scripture says, and I place a lesion of

tzara'at upon a house in the land of your possession (14:34), because it is

the Lord's strike against that house, and it only occurs in the land which is

God's possession, as it says: When you come to the land of Canaan, which I

am giving you as a possession (ibid). It does not occur because it is an

obligation of the soil, but rather because this matter can only come to pass in

the chosen land in which the honored Name resides.

 (RaMBaN Vayikra

13:47)

And if the garment is inflicted with leprosy: It is a certainty

that this could not possibly be a natural phenomenon, for such changes of

appearance can only occur in a garment either by artifice, when one colors it

with dyes, either deliberately or accidentally, or as the consequence of some

problem with the dyes used to color the garment, or with the work of the dyer,

or in the reaction of the dyed garment…

True, Scripture does testify that such a

wonder can occasionally occur in garments and houses, and it occurs in order to

get the owners of the affected items to pay attention to their sins, as the

Sages said regarding the Sabbatical Year: "Come and see how serious the

slightest infringement of the Sabbatical Year is: A man trades in fruits of the

Sabbatical Year, eventually he sells all of his moveable property; he does not

notice, eventually he sells his field, etc." All of this occurs out of

God's pity upon his people.

 (Seforno on Vayikra

13:47)

And the person with tzara'at, in whom there

He is unclean; he shall dwell isolated; his dwelling shall be outside the camp.

 (Vayikra, 13)

Why did the Torah decree that the metzora receive the punishment he

shall dwell isolated; his dwelling shall be outside the camp? [With his

slander and tale-bearing] he divided between man and wife, between man and his

fellow, therefore the Torah said: he shall dwell isolated.

 (Arakhin 16b)

Rabbi Zekharia, son-in-law of Rabbi Levi, said: The Merciful One does

not afflict humans first.

From where do we learn this? From Job. The oxen were plowing…

Sabeans attacked them… God's

fire fell from heaven… Only later, He took a potsherd to

scratch himself.

And so it was with Mahlon and Khilion; first their horses and camels

died, and then he died – Elimelech, Naomi's husband died, and then they died, as is written, Then

those two also died and only afterwards did she die.

And so with afflictions which come upon men; in the beginning it begins

with one's home. If he repents, the afflicted stones shall be removed. If he

does not repent, the house must be torn down. Afterwards it begins to afflict

his clothing. If he repents, the garment must be torn. Should he not repent,

the garment must be burned. After it begins to afflict the person's body. If he

repents, fine; if not – he shall dwell isolated; his dwelling shall be

outside the camp. And so it was with Egypt; first the measure of

justice struck at Egyptian property. Only later, And He struck every

firstborn in Egypt.

 (Yalkut Shimoni,

Parashat Bo, 247-186)

Then the priest shall order,

a strip of crimson [wool], and hyssop.

 (Vayikra 14:4)

A cedar stick: Because lesions of tzara’at come because of haughtiness

a strip of crimson

 (Rashi ad loc, based on Judaica Press translation)

The Rebbi from Gur, author of the Sefat

Emet, used to say: Why was it necessary also to bring the cedar tree, which

signifies pride? If the main intention is that the sinner lower himself like

the hyssop, is it not sufficient that he bring the hyssop alone?

But, when the penitent repents and examines

his sins, he reaches dejection and deep shame because of his previous pride. He

is mortified and embarrassed by the haughtiness attendant upon his sin. It

follows that his earlier pride now helps him attain humility. Therefore it is

right that the cedar be part of the cure.

 (S'fat Emet, as quoted in Ma'ayana Shel

Torah)

Lowliness and submission do not mean that

the body be bent and stooped, but that there be inside him a broken spirit even

when the body stands erect, as the Baal Shem Tov explained: "Let every

erect body bow down before you – bowing down before you, even with an erect

posture."

When one lowers himself like a hyssop – but

the humility is counterfeit, this kind of humble person is in need of

atonement.

 (Hiddushei HaRiYM)

The character of the

most unsociable being as represented by the tzippor dror – [literally, a

free bird. Commonly translated as "sparrow"], which refuses to accept

authority, is presented here in contrast to what is demanded for re-entrance

into the social life of the community. This is the contrast of the animals of

the "field" to the

humans of the "city". The demand which is made as the condition for

the re-entry into the social life of the community, and he shall

slaughter the bird, is energetic subjection of the wild untrammeled

animal life under the sharp control of the morally strong human will.

(From Rabbi S. R. Hirsch's commentary on Vayikra,

 quoted by Prof.

Nehama Leibowitz z'l in her Iyyunim Hadashim beSefer Vayikra, p.

162)

And the priest

shall examine the blemish [nega]

A person may see all blemishes, but not his own blemish,

nor the blemishes of his relatives.

(Mishnah Nega'im, 2:5)

On the contrary, let

our hearts see the fine qualities of our friends, not their deficiencies.

(From the supplication of Rebbi Elimelech of Lizhensk,

author of Noam Elimelech, recited before prayer.)

Something like a blemish

have I seen upon my house. Even if he is a scholar, and knows for certain

that it is a plague, he may not make a definite determination, saying: "I

have seen a blemish," but rather, Something like a blemish have I seen.

"Leprosy" [tzara'at]

is a comprehensive term covering sundry incompatible matters. Thus, whiteness

in a man's skin is called leprosy; the falling off of some of his hair on the head

or the chin is called leprosy; and a change of color in garments or in houses

is called leprosy.

Now this change in garments and

in houses which Scripture includes under the general term leprosy was no normal

happening, but was a portent and a wonder among the Israelites to warn them

against slanderous speaking. For if a man uttered slander the walls of his

house would suffer a change; if he repented the house would again become clean.

But if he continued in his wickedness until the house was torn down, leather

objects in his house on which he sat or lay would suffer a change; if he

repented they would again become clean. But if he continued in his wickedness

until they were burned, the garments which he wore would suffer a change: if he

repented, they would again become clean. But if he continued in his wickedness

until they were burned, his skin would suffer a change and he would become

leprous and be set apart and exposed all alone until he should no longer engage

in the conversation of the wicked, which is raillery and slander.

Now on this matter there is a

warning in Scripture which says, Take heed in the plague of leprosy…remember

what the Lord your God did to Miriam by the way (Devarim 24:9). That is to say, consider what befell

Miriam the prophetess, who spoke against her brother, even though she was older

than he and had nurtured him on her knees and had put herself in jeopardy to

save him from the sea. Now she did not speak against him but erred only in that

she put him on a level with other prophets; nor was he resentful about all

these things, for it is said, Now the man Moses was very meek (Bamidbar 12:3). Nevertheless, she was forthwith punished

with leprosy. How much more then does this apply to wicked and foolish people

who are profuse in speaking great and boastful things!

 (RaMBaM Mishneh Torah Hilkhot Tumat Tzara'at

16:10, Yale translation)

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 payable to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz

VeShalom-P.O.B. 4433, Jerusalem 91043.

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 NIF 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 to either the NIF or PEF should be marked as

donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project. For Donations

to NIF, please mention that Oz veShalom is registered as no. 5708.

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.