Splitting Hairs

Dear Rabbi,

Miriam Amanda Wallace "Ma" Ferguson was an American politician who served two non-consecutive terms as the governor of Texas, from 1925 to 1927 and 1933 to 1935. She was the first female governor of Texas and one of the first two women to be governor of any U.S. state. She was a colorful character in Texas politics who as governor tackled some of the tougher issues of the day. Though a teetotaler like her husband, she aligned herself with the "wets" in the battle over prohibition. She opposed the Ku Klux Klan, which was on the decline after 1925 because of a national murder and sex scandal by its president, D. C. Stephenson. All of that being said, I believe she is most remembered for a quote allegedly referring to bilingualism in Texas schools: "If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it ought to be good enough for the children of Texas." Whether she originated the quote is not relevant as to why I cited it.
It never ceases to amaze me that many people that declare themselves as “G-d fearing people” and think they know the passages in the Bible, whichever version that they look at, have no idea of what they are talking about. There is a ridiculous debate going on within this Country today about whether we should be wearing masks, socially distancing ourselves or being forced to quarantine if one is either sick with Covid-19 or have come in contact with someone that has it. To these people, you cannot take away their “G-d given right” as Americans to act as they deem  appropriate despite the pandemic that has caused havoc within the USA and beyond.

Despite its simplicity by today’s standards, parshah Tazrai-Metzora is extraordinary in its attempt to fight disease. Starting with the First Aliyah, it begins discussing the laws of tzara'at, a skin discoloration — often inaccurately translated as "leprosy" — which renders a person ritually impure. This aliyah discusses various forms of white skin discolorations. A person who has the symptoms of tzara'at must be seen by a priest. If the discoloration is deemed "suspicious," the priest will immediately declare the individual impure or quarantine him for up to two weeks. At the conclusion of the quarantine period, the priest either declares the individual pure or impure. The Torah then discusses what is done in the event that the tzara'at spreads after the individual was declared pure, or if there is raw skin within the tzara'at, or if the tzara'at has spread over the entire body. The parshah explains the laws of tzara'at which appears following an inflammation on the skin.

In the Second Aliyah, we learn that there are different forms of the disease such as the laws of tzara'at which appears following a burn to the skin. Tzara'at can also affect the areas on the body covered by hair. The symptoms and laws of such a tzara'at are quite different than standard tzara'at. This section concludes with the laws of a person afflicted by multiple dull white areas on his skin.

The Third Aliyah goes on to speak of another form of tzara'at that appears on a bald spot, as well a white discoloration streaked with red, which can appear anywhere on the body. Also discussed is the procedure followed by an individual who is afflicted with tzara'at, the main requirement being that he must remain outside the city until his condition clears up. The parshah then discusses "clothing tzara'at," a green or red discoloration which can affect certain types of materials. The garment is shown to a priest who quarantines it for up to two weeks.

The Fourth Aliyah goes on to describe what is done at the conclusion of the quarantine period, depending on the circumstances the garment is either declared pure, or completely burnt, or only the part which was discolored is torn out and burnt. Although I have some problems with the “purification procedure for a person who contracted tzara'at” as it relates to animal sacrifices and other articles that are to be used, I can attribute this to the time in which it was being used.

The Fifth Aliyah goes on about the “purification process” but does show that G-d wants all that are afflicted to offer something that is within their means, again showing a remarkable “leap” from the common thought of the time.

The Sixth Aliyah “thinks ahead” to the Israelites time in Canaan and even has steps to stop the spread of the disease that is found on the walls of the houses to be built.

I have some problems with the Seventh Aliyah and its discussion. This section discusses the ritual impurity contracted by a man who issues a (normal) seminal discharge, the ritual impurity of a menstruating woman, and of a man who cohabits with her. All such people must immerse in a mikvah (ritual pool) in order to be purified. Under certain circumstances a menstruating woman was required to bring to the Temple two bird offerings in order to attain purity. What makes the act of lovemaking “impure” that requires a procedure to “cure” it?
Since I have asked the question above, I would like to go back to the First Aliyah and the following as stated in Leviticus 12:7:

“And he shall offer it up before the Lord and effect atonement for her, and thus, she will be purified from the source of her blood. This is the law of a woman who gives birth to a male or to a female.”

A dictionary definition of “atonement” states that it is the “making of amends or the making of reparation for a sin or a mistake.” Why does a woman’s menstrual period after birth need to be “atoned”, and why are there different time periods depending on whether the woman gives birth to a boy or girl?

Going back to what I wrote at the beginning of my reflections of this parshah, I was struck by the sophistication of some of the methods used, despite the simplicity of some of the acts of the priest and what he was to look for upon reexamination. In the Second Aliyah at Leviticus 13:33 the following is stated:

“he shall shave himself, but adjacent to the nethek he shall not shave, and the kohen shall quarantine [the person with] the nethek again for seven days.”

So despite the requirement of someone that is afflicted with the disease having to shave his entire body, in order for the priest to determine whether there is a spread of the Nethek, he can look at the hairs within the diseased area to see if it has spread.

Maybe those that profess to be following G-d’s commands should look at the “Book” before they make fools of themselves. 

Shalom,
Mordecai


Dear Mordecai,
One of the greatest arguments against religion is religious people. What is such a shame is that the people who are religious in an outward facing sense are so anti-medicine and science, like the people you refer to who aren’t obeying COVID protocols.
 
Anyone who can find meaning in Tazria-Metzora is a student of the Torah. You have delved into the minutia, the details of the first couple of aliyot. From what I sense, you are looking at this double parsha through a medical lens.
 
Your objections to how the Torah frames sexual relations shows how powerful and deep the commitment is to our modern ethos around sex, which regards it as healthy and enjoyable.
 
One possible answer to why a woman’s menstrual period puts her in a state of impurity may be that the Torah was written during a sexist period. This explanation can only go so far in explaining to us the rationale behind the law. To me the importance of the period of impurity is that it allows the husband and wife to enjoy a reset at the close of the period of impurity, thus keeping their relationship and their sexual attraction fresh. This is the effect of the law, and that is a positive.
 
I don’t know how to react to the level of detail that you praise. When I reflect upon it, I think I do see it as you do. There is something remarkable about an ancient text which is so concerned with the well-being of the body that it goes into such depth in its description of treatment for an inflammation.
 
Your larger claim about how people who are religious in an outward facing sense are ignorant of the text they read is not my experience. I have found many committed religious people to be extremely well-read and knowledgeable about the Bible. The one area of weakness, however, particularly for Christians would have to be the Book of Leviticus. Early Christianity deemphasized it because of its ritualistic character.
 
I am reluctant to read this double parsha as a proto-medical text, but I am also resistant to how I see tradition interpreting this double parsha. The focus shifts away entirely from the detail and content that you painstakingly reviewed. Instead, we learn that tzarat is a punishment for leshon harah. The benefit, of course, of this shift is that it makes the double parsha quite relevant since leshon harah continues to this day where as tzarat has not been detected in more than two thousand years.
 
What strikes me as most interesting about tzarat is that it is a skin infection. The skin is what serves as a barrier between inside and outside. So much of our lives is about mediating the outside world into our inner life. The existence of a skin inflammation suggests that some kind of hold-up or trouble is taking place as what is on the outside is transformed onto what is on the inside. From some, living on the surface is all that matters, but for most of us, our inner experience is what matters most, and the challenge of living is making sense inwardly of what is happening outside of our bodies.

Shalom,
Rabbi



Dear Rabbi,

To be honest, when I stated that those that profess knowledge of the Bible do not read it, I was thinking of it from the prospective of Christians. If I could have come back and asked Miriam Amanda Wallace "Ma" Ferguson whether she knew that Jesus was actually speaking in Hebrew, she might have told the police to take me away as a heretic. But after reading your response, it seems to me that Jews, especially the Orthodox, are as guilty of not "understanding" what they are reading as my take on some of the Christian rhetoric. 
Take the measles problem that made its way from Israel to Brooklyn as one example but even worse was the Orthodox response to Covid with mass gatherings and a general contempt for masks and the like in the beginning. As bad as it was for NYC in general during the first few months, the sickness and death rate in the Orthodox communities of Brooklyn were even worse. I do not for one minute think that the Orthodox do not read Tazria-Metzora but if they understood what quarantine meant, maybe their earlier problems would not have been as bad as it was reported. 
 
My reflection on the "minutia" as you put it was an admiration of how the early text of the Torah did understand basic differences within a disease as the new variants of Covid have shown us. You are also correct in why I pointed out that the text even showed ways of depicting the disease by literally "splitting hairs". There is also something to be said for the washing of clothing as well as the body to see that our ancestors had some basic knowledge of how to stop the spread of a disease. 

Shalom,
Mordecai



Dear Mordecai,

This is quite a bold response, Mordecai, but I don’t expect anything less from you. Whether we understand what the Bible says really is a question not about its content but about the enactment of the content. In other words, what understanding the Bible really means is living by the Bible. This is where the challenges arise because of our human nature.
 
The Torah itself makes no explicit mention of medicine or science, but over time, rabbinic leadership taught that one should listen to doctors. As we entered the modern era, the authority of men and women of medicine grew. Now, some Jews see men and women of science as the only authorities. The ultra-Orthodox community differs in this respect. They still award authority to people who are only well-versed in Talmudic study. Why this often devolves into a lack of respect for science and its authority is a wonder to me, but I suppose I shouldn’t take for granted how easy embracing science’s authority is.
 
As I may or may not have shared with you, this COVID year has been a turning point for me in my relationship with Orthodox Judaism. I would say that up until the COVID era, I was an Orthodox fellow-traveler or sympathizer. How the ultra Orthodox behaved during COVID has disabused me of this disposition. In certain ways, that is disorienting. The idea that Orthodoxy is the most expression of Judaism most continuous with our past can be comforting. Now, not only do I not believe they are, but I realize that continuity with the past is only one factor in religious life. Discontinuity perhaps need to be embraced for the sake of a future.
 
“Splitting hairs”! Very nice pun.
 
Although I discourage readings of the Torah that frame the conversation as one that is proto-hygienic, I do recognize at some level that is unavoidable. That cleanliness is so crucial to ritual purity cannot be without any meaning.

Shalom,
Rabbi


Dear Rabbi,

If I understand where you are going as it applies to the ultra-Orthodox, if somehow we get a "High Priest", they would adhere to whatever direction this person gave including such things as quarantining. Forgetting about Covid for a minute, the measles is a "skin rash" which maybe has its origins with what came under the umbrella of tzara'at or as it was translated, leprosy. If so, I pity the direction the ultra-Orthodox are going. I would think that the "Grand Rebbe" would also qualify under today's standards, so maybe it is the fault of those that carry weight that are at fault.  
 
I fully understand that we as Jews are not supposed to explain such things as keeping kosher to maybe such things as a healthier diet, but such things as trichinosis from a pig. I also remember reading somewhere that although Jews were murdered because others blamed them for causing the "Black Death" or the Bubonic Plague, which is a story that should be expanded on, it was the isolation of the Jewish population form the mainstream that lowered their percentage of death from the plague. In other words "quarantining" does have beneficial effects. Why today's ultra-Orthodox refuse to understand what is written in the Torah has no rational explanation. 

Shalom,
Mordecai

Dear Mordecai,

When you speak about the High Priest, what I hear you talking about is authority. The real issue at stake in Jewish life and what differentiates the movements from one another is authority – where it rests and who has it.
 
In the Orthodox world – modern and ultra – authority rests with the Talmudic scholars. In the Reform world, authority rests with the individual since autonomy is paramount. As always, explaining how authority works in the Conservative world is the most complicated proposition since we affirm “tradition and change.”
 
Yes, what is so striking about how the ultra orthodox have behaved during COVID is how their leadership has put their own people at risk because they feel threatened by other sources of authority, for example the authority of science.
 
Regarding the Black Death and the incidence of the disease among Jews, see this essay.
 
Ultra-Orthodox refusal is grounded in several factors, but I assert that this issue of authority and who has it is paramount.  

Shalom,
Rabbi


Dear Rabbi,

I guess we are saying the same thing in different ways. My reading of this week's parshah leads me to the conclusion that in the "good old days" there was no profession known as a "doctor" and the priest took on medical care as part of his duties. To me it was not based on any Talmudic authority but was based in science as crude as it might have been. Basing it on some Talmudic interpretation takes away what I thought was revolutionary for its day, namely dealing with a disease in a scientific/medical manner. I used the "High Priest" illustration as a blind adherence to a text that deserves to be absorbed and evolved rather than taken literally. I do not think the orthodox are doing that. 
 
I am aware of the Black Death and how Jews were treated with terrible pogroms because of the ignorance of the general public as to why the disease did not effect Jews as much as other ethnic groups. My point was that because of adherence to kosher laws and other acts of cleanliness taken from the Torah, Jews were spared certain diseases whether they understood why or not. This concept is not being carried over by certain sects of our religion today. 

Shalom,
Mordecai

Dear Mordecai,
In fact, I think we are saying different things and maybe in different ways, too!
 
I emphatically reject the proto-medical explanation for such passages in the Torah. These passages are not crude science or science at all. Some relationship exists between ritual and cleanliness, but whether this is hygiene or not is incidental. That doesn’t mean I favor the tradition’s radical reworking either so that the text says something altogether different from what it appears to say.
 
In the essay I sent you, the author pushes back against the idea that Jews fared better during the Black Death because of our ritual laws and keeping apart. The author challenges the claim that Jews fared better. If they did, he attributes it to genetics, not halakha.

Shalom,
Rabbi 


Comments