Parshas Metzora
1. The name of this week's sedra, as it is called by the Rishonim — Rav Saadia Gaon1, Rashi2 and the Rambam3 — is "זאת תהיה" ("This shall be"). In the later generations, however, the custom of the Jewish people (which is itself Torah) is to call it by the name "Metzora"4.
This needs to be understood: "Metzora" (one afflicted with tzaraas) is an undesirable matter5. Seemingly, it is not fitting to call a sedra of the Torah by such a name. All the more so since earlier it was in fact called by a different name, and (it turns out that) in the later generations its earlier name was changed in order to call it by an undesirable name6?!
2. To understand this, we must first preface an explanation of the wording of the verse, "זאת תהיה תורת המצורע גו' והובא אל הכהן" ("This shall be the law of the metzora… and he shall be brought to the kohen"). This is not understood:
a) The verse says later, "ויצא הכהן אל מחוץ למחנה" ("And the kohen shall go out to outside the camp") — that the kohen had to go out to the metzora. So what is meant by "and he shall be brought to the kohen"? (The metzora)7 was not permitted to come in to the kohen; he must, after all, remain outside the three camps8!
b) Why does it say (not "ובא אל הכהן" ("he shall come to the kohen"), but rather) "and he shall be brought to the kohen" — he is to be brought to the kohen — a wording which indicates that his coming to the kohen is against his will9?
Regarding the first question, commentators seek to answer10 that "and he shall be brought to the kohen" means that, while remaining outside the camp, the metzora should nevertheless come up to the very border of the camp of Israel, in order to spare the kohen trouble — so that the kohen should not need to go far outside the camp to the metzora's place.
This explanation, however, is not understood11: When the metzora must go out of the camp, he is not obligated in the first place to distance himself at all. He must indeed go out beyond the three camps — but he may remain quite close to the boundary of the camp of Israel12. And since the wording "and he shall be brought" applies to every metzora — not only to one who has gone far away from the edge of the camp, but also to one who is located right next to the camp of Israel — the wording "and he shall be brought" does not fit him.
3. The explanation of this, in the inner dimension of matters, is as follows:
Rashi13 gives the reason why a metzora must dwell "בדד" ("alone"): because "he caused separation through lashon hara… between a man and his fellow; he too shall be13* separated"14.
Accordingly, it can be said that the fact that the metzora must be "outside the three camps," even outside the camp of Israel, is because he has a connection to (kelipas Midian15, a term derived from) "מדון ומריבה" ("strife and quarrel")16 (for, as mentioned above, "he caused separation etc."), and this is the opposite of the entire concept of holiness (whose content17 is unity and inclusion)18. Therefore he cannot be even in the camp of Israel — the lowest level of the camps of holiness.
[Moreover: just as there are three camps in holiness, so too there are three levels (camps) in the "opposite side" — lehavdil — as it is written19, "וישלחו מן המחנה כל צרוע וכל זב וכל טמא לנפש" ("They shall send out of the camp every metzora, every zav, and everyone defiled by a dead body"). Among these there are "other impure people" and the metzora — and the law is: "בדד ישב" ("He shall dwell alone") — "that other impure people shall not dwell with him"20: the metzora must be outside even the camps of the other impure people.
The reason for this is: those who speak lashon hara ultimately come "to speak against G‑d21 and to deny the fundamental principle"21*. Consequently, they are even worse than the sitra achra and the kelipah called idolatry, for those acknowledge the Al-mighty, only they call Him22 "the G‑d of gods"23.]
Nevertheless, the Alter Rebbe rules — both in the revealed part of the Torah24 [OCR unclear] — regarding every Jew, whoever he may be, that "he will certainly ultimately do teshuvah," because "לא ידח ממנו נדח"25 ("no one banished will remain banished from Him").
Therefore the verse says, "and he shall be brought (an expression of promise for the future) to the kohen" — that even one who finds himself outside the three camps, G‑d assures that ultimately he will be brought to the "kohen."
And since the promise that "he will certainly ultimately do teshuvah" applies even to one who, from his own standpoint, has no desire whatsoever to do teshuvah; and moreover, even to one whose desire is the very opposite — "העולה על רוחכם… נהיה כגוים גו'" ("That which enters your mind… 'We will be like the nations'")26 — nevertheless, "ביד חזקה גו' אמלוך עליכם" ("With a strong hand… I will reign over you")27 — therefore it says, "and he shall be brought (an expression of command) to the kohen": "he shall be brought" — against his will.
4. Although the cause of the arousal of teshuvah is [not the person's own state, but rather] G‑d's promise that "no one banished will remain banished from Him" — which is why it reaches even one who must come to "With a strong hand… I will reign over you"28 — G‑d nevertheless desires that the arousal of teshuvah should ultimately take hold of the Jew inwardly. For this reason G‑d established that the matter of "with a strong hand…" should ultimately affect the soul-powers of the Jew himself, so that his teshuvah should come from his own powers — his will, intellect, feelings, and so on.
This is the explanation of why the verse first says "and he shall be brought to the kohen," and afterwards, "and the kohen shall go out to outside the camp, etc.":
The beginning of "the purification of the metzora" (teshuvah) comes through a revelation of light from Above, which bears no relation to the spiritual state and place of the metzora, nor to his will. This is the meaning of "and he shall be brought to the kohen": he is taken out of his place and state and brought to the "kohen" against his will.
Afterwards, however, there must be "and the kohen shall go out to outside the camp, etc." — the arousal must be drawn down into the place (physical and spiritual — that is,) the level where the metzora finds himself, so that his "purification" should come not only from the "kohen," but also from the "metzora" himself — from his own will, intellect, and so on29.
And through the purification being accomplished also from the place of the "metzora" himself — outside the camp — so that even the intentional sins are transformed into merits30, he then becomes higher than a complete tzaddik who was never "outside the camp"31.
5. In light of all the above, we will also understand why in the early generations the sedra was called "This shall be," while in the later generations it is called "Metzora":
The true meaning of "אתהפכא חשוכא לנהורא" ("transforming darkness into light") — that the darkness itself is transformed into light32 — will only come about in the Time to Come33. For then there will be the revelation of the Essence, and only from Its standpoint34 (for to It, light and darkness are equal) can this mode of "transformation" come about35.
Therefore, in the early generations — when we were still "far" from the revelation of the Time to Come, and the "and the kohen shall go out to outside the camp, etc." did not yet shine — that the purification of the metzora should come from the metzora himself — and only "and he shall be brought to the kohen"36 was revealed, they did not yet call a sedra of the Torah by the name "Metzora." For when the purification of the metzora comes from a revelation of light from Above, and not from his own matter, the metzora — from his own standpoint — has not been transformed into the light of Torah.
However, since it was known that in the Time to Come the darkness itself will be transformed into light, they named the sedra "זאת37 תהיה" ("This shall be") — that in the Time to Come there will be "the Torah of the metzora": the metzora will become "Torah."
But (a) the words "תורת המצורע" ("the Torah of the metzora") were not included (explicitly) in the name of the sedra, and "This shall be" merely alludes to "the Torah of the metzora"; (b) with the name "This shall be," in the future tense, it is emphasized that it is something that will come only later.
In the later generations, however (which are called "the footsteps of Moshiach"), the matter of Moshiach is heard among Jews. Jews "hear" and feel that Moshiach — "הנה זה עומד אחר כתלנו" ("Behold, he stands behind our wall")38; moreover, the wall already has windows and lattices; moreover, he — Moshiach — is "משגיח מן החלונות מציץ מן החרכים" ("watching through the windows, peering through the lattices"): he looks and watches over us (it is only that he is not seen39 — and this is only because "our wall" — our own wall — conceals him). Therefore Jews make even of "Metzora"40 a sedra in the Torah41, because the revelation of the Time to Come — "And night will shine like day"41 — already shines in the Torah.
(From the sichos of Shabbos Parshas Metzora, 5725)
Notes
1) In his Siddur — the Torah reading.
2) In his commentary on the Torah, Tazria 13:8.
3) In his "Seder Tefillos," at its end.*
*) In Hilchos Tefillah 13:2 he writes: "This shall be the law of the metzora." However, it can be said that the intent there is the beginning of the reading, not the name of the sedra. This explains several differences between his wording in Hilchos Tefillah there and his wording in Seder Tefillos. See Likkutei Sichos vol. 5, p. 57, note 1 — in the gloss.
4) Tur and Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 428.
5) This is why in several sefarim it is called Parshas "Taharah" ("Purification") [and see Likkutei Sichos vol. 1, p. 239, that my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe, would generally refrain from mentioning the name of this parsha, and most of the time would mention (orally and likewise in writing) only the day of the month and the like]. See below, note 40.
6) Especially since the beginning of the sedra (after the opening "And [G‑d] spoke…," which is the same in very many sedras) is "This shall be."
7) Unlike "and he shall be brought to the kohen" in Parshas Tazria (13:2).
8) This question is asked by the Shach (on the Torah), Kli Yakar and Tzror HaMor here. Likewise it is asked in Likkutei Torah, Parshas Tazria 25, end of col. a. See also Ramban here.
9) This question is asked by the Shach and Kli Yakar here. See also Ibn Ezra, Ramban and Ohr HaChayim here.
10) Sforno and Chizkuni here.
11) In addition: the subject of this parsha is "This shall be the law of the metzora." It is therefore reasonable to say that the law "and he shall be brought to the kohen" [especially as it is the first law stated immediately (and in the same verse) after the introduction "This shall be…"] is a law that pertains (not to the honor of the kehunah, but rather) to the law of the metzora.
12) Furthermore: since "he shall dwell alone; outside the camp shall be his dwelling" is a punishment (a source of pain), he will surely try to lessen the isolation by dwelling as near as possible.
13) Tazria 13:46. Arachin 16b, beginning.
13*) So it reads in the Vilna 5652 printing. In the first printing: "נבדל". In several printings: "יבדל" (omitting the word "יהא").
14) And although he is sent out only from walled cities (Keilim 1:7), he is nevertheless thereby separated and distinguished from other impure people.
15) Note Likkutei Torah, Tazria 23d, and Ohr HaTorah there (vol. 2), p. 530.
16) See Zohar II, 68a; and Likkutei Torah [of the Arizal] and Sefer HaLikkutim, beginning of Parshas Yisro (cited in Mikdash Melech on the Zohar there): "Midian… in holiness it is love, and in kelipah, enmity and strife."
17) See also Tanya, ch. 32.
18) Likkutei Torah, Matos 85d. Maamar "Hachaltzu" 5659, ch. 3 ff.; ch. 16. Maamar "Isa BaZohar" — printed in the addendum to the aforementioned maamar "Hachaltzu" (and in Sefer HaMaamarim 5659, p. 211).
19) Naso 5:2.
20) Pesachim 67a. Toras Kohanim (cited in Rashi), Tazria there.
21) Rambam, end of Hilchos Tumas Tzaraas.
21*) The connection to the above in the text — that he is sent outside etc. because of his connection to kelipas Midian — is understood in light of the verse "נקמת ה' במדין" ("the vengeance of the L‑rd against Midian"): Midian stands directly opposed to the level of the Name Havayah (as referenced in note 18).
22) End of Menachos (regarding the nations of the world — and their vitality comes from kelipas nogah). And in Tanya, ch. 24, that even the kelipah of idolatry itself "knows its Master etc." See there.
23) In Tanya there, that for this reason "a person who transgresses His will… is worse and lower than the sitra achra and the kelipah called idolatry" — anyone who transgresses [and there, p. 30, beginning of col. b, it is stated explicitly: even a minor sin]. As for why being sent beyond the three camps applies specifically to a metzora, it can be said: in Tanya itself it is explained that a person commits a sin because he does not feel that it is heresy etc.; on the contrary, it seems to him that he still remains within his Judaism. Therefore, with an ordinary sin he can remain in the camp of holiness — unlike the metzora, who is judged on account of where he ends up: "denying the fundamental principle" (see Rambam there).
24) Hilchos Talmud Torah 4:3.
25) Tanya, end of ch. 39.
26) II Shmuel 17:14 (with a change of wording).
27) Yechezkel 20:32.
28) Ibid., 33.
29) See similarly Likkutei Torah, our parsha, 25b: "'And he shall be brought to the kohen' — this is the arousal of ratzo… and afterwards 'the kohen shall go out' — this is the drawing down of shov, to become enclothed in vessels and letters."
30) For in the case of "and he shall be brought to the kohen" — although then too the person is a baal teshuvah — since the teshuvah comes from the revelation of light from Above, the teshuvah does not relate to the intentional sins themselves, but only to the person in whom the sins were. Whereas the teshuvah of "and the kohen shall go out to outside the camp, etc." relates to the sins themselves. See note 32.
31) See Rambam, Hilchos Teshuvah 7:4.
32) This applies only when the teshuvah is in the manner of "and the kohen shall go out to outside the camp." Whereas in the manner of "and he shall be brought to the kohen" — even when the teshuvah is in the manner of is'hapcha (transformation, which is higher than iskafya, subjugation) — it is only in such a way that the place of the darkness is transformed into light, but not that the darkness itself is transformed (see the hemshech of Rosh Hashanah 5695 (in Sefer HaMaamarim Kuntreisim vol. 2), ch. 29, that there are two interpretations of "transforming darkness into light").
33) As it is written (Tehillim 139:12), "ולילה כיום יאיר" ("And night will shine like day"), which means that in the Time to Come "the darkness itself will shine" (Imrei Binah, Shaar HaTzitzis, ch. 16; Shir HaShirim 43b; and elsewhere. See also the maamar Basi LeGani 5711, ch. 5).
34) Whereas from the standpoint of the level of light — even infinite light (although, being infinite, it comes also into the place of darkness — the first mode of transformation (see note 32 above) — nevertheless) — since it is defined within the category of "light" (only that the "light" itself is infinite), it does not have the ability to transform the darkness itself. See above, pp. 44–45.
35) See the aforementioned hemshech, ch. 34, that the power to transform darkness into light comes only from the Essence. For light and darkness, as He bears them within Himself — that He is able to shine and able not to shine — are not two matters, but one matter: that He, may He be blessed, is omnipotent. See above, there.
36) For every single day a heavenly voice proclaims, "Woe to the creatures because of the insult to the Torah" (Avos 6:2), and three times each night the Holy One, blessed be He, roars like a lion and says, "Woe to the children etc." (Berachos 3a; this is why one should pray at that time etc. — Tur and Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 1. It requires some further investigation why the Alter Rebbe omitted this in the second edition of his Shulchan Aruch).
37) Note Menachos (53b): "'This' — this refers to the Torah."
38) See the "Kol Korei" of my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe (printed in "HaKeriah VehaKedushah," Sivan 5701; his Igros Kodesh vol. 5, p. 367), which interprets this verse as referring to Moshiach.
39) See Sanhedrin 98a, end: "bearing illnesses," and Rashi there.
40) Accordingly, one can explain the reason of those whose custom is to call this parsha "Taharah," choosing a refined expression (compare "סגי נהור" — "full of light," a euphemism for a blind person) — although seemingly it would have been more fitting to call it by its name stated explicitly in the Siddur of Rav Saadia Gaon and in the Rambam's Seder Tefillos, "This shall be." For "This shall be" does not indicate the matter of "metzora" [on the contrary: "shall be" — future tense — emphasizes that now it has not yet been transformed etc., as explained above in the text]. Whereas when they call it "Taharah," they are in fact calling it "Metzora," only choosing a refined expression (the simple reason; and it can be said that they were drawn to this name because now it is already "the day of his purification" — similar to what is explained in the text).
41) Tehillim, ibid. See note 33 above.
Key Lesson
G‑d assures that no Jew will remain banished: even one who is "outside the camp" will ultimately be brought to teshuvah, even against his will. Yet G‑d's deeper desire is that teshuvah should come from within the person himself, so that even his darkness is transformed into light. In our generation, so close to Moshiach, that future transformation already shines — which is why even the name "Metzora" has become a sedra of the Torah.