Introduction
The Torah (Leviticus 13:1 -14:57) describes the details of this affliction, related laws of impurity, and rites of purification. A companion article on this web site discussed the many laws of tzaraat as applied to a person or his garments. This article approach tzaraat from an aggadic viewpoint and focus on the following aspects:
- Sin
- Rehabilitation
- Medical Condition
The author will cite, analyze, and compare different texts from the Bible, Talmud, Midrash, and Zohar using the pardes method to partially understand divine judgment.
Sin
Although the Torah does not specifically indicate which sin or sins precipitate this affliction, there are several verses in scripture which indicate cause of this affliction. The author will list explicit examples from scripture and then discuss the sins as mentioned in the Talmud, Midrash and Zohar as shown in the following table:
| Source | Number of Sins |
| Talmud Arachin 16a | 7 |
| Leviticus Rabbah 17:3 | 10 |
| Numbers Rabbah 7:5 | 12 |
| Midrash Tanchuma (Parshat Metzora 4) | 14 |
| Zohar (3:206a) | 12 |
Literal Meaning – פשט
Based on a literal reading of scripture the following examples, in chronological order, illustrate where sin led to tzaraat.
Pentateuch
- Illicit relations – when Pharaoh seized Sarah and planned to place her in his harem Hashem struck him with a plague of tzaraat (Genesis 12:17 and Genesis Rabbah 41:2).
- Derogatory speech – when Moses imputed that the Israelites would not believe that Hashem had commanded Moses to rescue the Israelites from Egypt (Exodus 4:1), Hashem struck Moses with tzaraat (ibid. 4:6). Similarly when Miriam spoke ill of Moses (Numbers 12:1), Hashem struck her with tzaraat (ibid. 12:10). The Torah reiterates the mention of this sin (Deuteronomy 24:9), “Remember what Hashem did to Miriam (i.e. afflicted her with tzaraat).
Prophets
- Murder – when Joab, commander of King David’s army, killed Avner (2 Samuel 3:27), former chief of King Saul’s army and supporter of King Saul’s son. After a dispute between Ish Boshet, son of King Saul (ibid. 2:8), Avner decided to join forces with King David. When Joab heard of the potential alliance between Avner and King David, Joab killed Avner to protect his position as commander of King David’s army. When King David heard that Joab had killed Avner he cursed him and his descendants with tzaraat as the verse states (ibid. 3:29), “May it rest upon the head of Joab and all his father’s house, that they … should be smitten with tzaraat, weakness, death by sword, or poverty.”
- Vain (false) oath (Talmud Arachin 16a) or desecration of the name of Hashem (Leviticus Rabbah 17:3 and Numbers Rabbah 7:5) – Chapter 5 of 2 Kings relates that Naaman, general of the Aramean army, was afflicted with tzaraat (ibid. 5:1). The Midrash (ibid.) notes that even though Naaman was a gentile, Hashem afflicted him with tzaraat because of his haughtiness as the verse states (ibid. 5:1), “Now Naaman, the general of the king of Aram, was a great man before his master (i.e. King of Aram).” The Midrash interprets the word “great” as also in his own eyes (i.e. haughtiness) The Arameans captured a young Israelite girl who became a servant to Naaman’s wife (ibid. 5:2). The young girl suggested to her mistress that Naaman go to Israel and seek the prophet in Samaria (i.e. Elisha) who could cure Naaman (Ibid. 5:3). Naaman accepted her advice and travelled to the prophet (ibid. 5:9). Elisha dispatched a messenger to him, saying: Go and immerse yourself seven times in the Jordan and your flesh will be restored (ibid. 5:10).” Elisha wished to convey to Naaman that Hashem can cure Naaman in a miraculous way since there are larger rivers in Aram (ibid. 5:12). At first Naaman was offended by Elisha’s suggestion thinking that Elisha was brushing him off. Naaman later reconsidered and immersed himself 7 times in the Jordan River and was immediately cured (ibid. 5:14). Overwhelmed by his recovery Naaman exclaimed, “Behold, now I know that there is no G-d in all the earth except in Israel, accept a gift from your servant (ibid. 5:15).” Elisha refused the gift to show that the cure was a miracle from Hashem and not an opportunity to profit (ibid. 5:16). Gehazi, the servant of Elisha, was not motivated by the same ideals as his master and ran after Naaman to take the gift (ibid. 5:20), including two talents (between 60-100 kg) of silver. Gehazi falsely claimed that two disciples of the prophets had recently arrived and Elisha was willing to accept Naaman’s gift to help them (ibid. 5:22). When Elisha found out that Gehazi had betrayed him, he cursed Gehazi with tzaraat as the story concludes (5:27), “Now Naaman’s tzaraat shall cling to you and to your children forever. Gehazi went away from stricken with tzaraat, white as snow.” In this episode the Talmud focuses on the sin of a vain oath. Naaman did not believe that Elisha would accept a gift and asked Gehazi to take an oath to bolster his claim (ibid. 5:23). The Talmud interprets the word (הואל) as to take an oath. The Midrash (Leviticus Rabbah 17:3 and Numbers 7:5) defines the sin of Gehazi as the desecration of Hashem’s name by reducing the miraculous recovery to an opportunity to profit and tarnishing the reputation of Elisha.
- Haughtiness (Talmud Arachin 16a) or usurping of power (Leviticus Rabbah 17:3 and Numbers Rabbah 7:5) – Chapter 26 of 2 Chronicles relates that King Uzziah of Judah was victorious in war (ibid. 26:6-7), fortified cities (ibid. 9-10), engaged in agriculture (ibid. 10), and enlarged his army (ibid. 26:13). Overcome by his success he became haughty and “went into the Temple to burn incense on the altar of incense (ibid 26:16)”. The priests warned him that this was a trespass in the eyes of Hashem because only priests from the sons of Aaron are allowed to offer incense and not Israelites from the tribe of Judah (ibid. 26:18). Instead of heading the warning of the priests, King Uzziah became furious and was prepared to throw the censer of incense at the priests (Rashi on ibid. 26:19)! Immediately Hashem afflicted Uzziah with tzaraat and he fled the temple (ibid. 26:19-20). Due to his abuse of power he lost his position as king and remained with tzaraat for the rest of his life (ibid. 26:21).
Exegesis – דרש
In addition to the above sins which are clearly mentioned in scripture the Talmud, Midrash, and Zohar list additional sins which are inferred from scripture as follows.
Talmud Arachin 16a – 7 Sins
The Talmud (ibid.) lists 7 sins which may lead to tzaraat as shown in the following table which lists the sins and associated verses. These sins include offences between man and man and man to Hashem.
| Sin | Verse |
| Derogatory speech | Psalms 101:5 |
| Murder | 2 Samuel 3:29 |
| Vain oaths | 2 Kings 5:23 and 5:27 |
| Illicit relations | Genesis 12:17 |
| Haughtiness | 2 Chronicles 26:16 and 19 |
| Theft | Leviticus 14:36 |
| Stinginess | Leviticus 14:35 |
Derogatory speech
The Talmud (Arachin 15b-16a) considers derogatory speech (הרע לשון) as the primary cause for tzaraat and is therefore listed first. The Talmud quotes Psalms 101:5, “He who slanders his neighbor in secret, will I (Hashem) cut him down. One whose eyes are raised up high and his heart is expansive; I (Hashem) cannot tolerate.” The literal meaning of this verse refers to King David who will not listen to slander when determining government policy and will not associate with conceited people. The Talmud applies this verse to Hashem who will not tolerate derogatory speech.
The reader may ask, “Why did the Talmud not quote the verse of derogatory speech in reference to Miriam (e.g. Numbers 12:1 or Deuteronomy 24:9)? The Maharsha, 16th century commentator on the Talmud, on Arachin 15b answers that the Talmud chose a verse which indicates that the sin of derogatory speech will likely lead to confirmed metzora status which requires a full purification process as explained through a word association as follows.
The Talmud (ibid.) notes that Psalms 101:5 uses the expression “I will cut him down“ (in Hebrew אצמית). The Torah also uses a similar word in reference to the Jubilee year where the land must return to its original owner, as the verse states (Leviticus 25:23), “The land shall not be sold permanently (לצמתת).” Hence there is a connection between “cut him down” and “permanently” in Hebrew. In addition there is a link when translating to Aramaic. The Targum Onkelos translates the word (לצמתת) as לחלוטין. In turn the Mishna in Megillah 8b uses the word מוחלט for a confirmed metzora hence the link between “cut him down“ and “confirmed metzora”. This step concludes the derivation from Hebrew to Aramaic and then back to Hebrew. This somewhat complex derivation illustrates the depth of the Torah and the subtlety when using hints and allusions (רמז).
It is interesting to note that the word אצמית only occurs twice in scripture and both in Psalms 101 verses 5 and 8 referring to Hashem’s corrective action against slanderers and the wicked, respectively. In addition, the gematria of the word אצמית is 541, which corresponds to Israel, indicating that Hashem may cut down those that do not live up to the standards of the name ישראל which means the upright of G-d ל-א ישר. This may be another reason why the Talmud chose this verse for derogatory speech.
Similarly, Maimonides writes (Laws of Tzaraat 16:10), “Tzaraat is not a natural occurrence. Rather it is a sign and a wonder prevalent among the Jewish people to warn them against derogatory speech. The Torah Deuteronomy 24:8-9 warns about this: Be careful with regard to tzaraat. Remember what Hashem did to Miriam.”
Maimonides (ibid.) further explains, “Contemplate what happened to the prophetess Miriam who spoke against her brother. She was older than Moses, saved him from the river, raised him, and did not speak pejoratively of him. Rather she erred in equating him with other prophets. Moses did not object to any of this, as Numbers 12:3 relates: The man Moses was exceedingly humble.” Nevertheless, she was immediately punished with tzaraat. Certainly, an inference can be made with regard to wicked or foolish people who speak extensively about great and wondrous matters. Therefore a person … should distance himself from their gatherings and from speaking to them so that he will not become caught up in the web of their sin.”
The Talmud finds other indications that derogatory speech or slander may lead to tzaraat in terms of:
- Hebrew syntax (Leviticus 14:2).
- Law of separation (Leviticus 13:46).
- Purification rite (Leviticus 14:4-7).
Hebrew Syntax
The Torah (Leviticus 14:2) opens the passage about one recovering from tzaraat, “This shall be the law of the person afflicted with tzaraat (המצרע).” The Talmud (Arachin 15b) finds an acronym in the word המצרע (one afflicted with tzaraat) as רע שם המוציא (i.e. slanderer – literally one who spreads a bad reputation). The Hebrew letters ה,מ,צ,ר,ע of the word המצרע are also contained in the expression of a slanderer. The Maharsha, 16th century Talmudic commentator, points out that the additional letter מ in the word המצרע leads to this allusion because elsewhere the Torah calls the afflicted one הצרוע or in slightly different forms (Leviticus 13:44, 13:45, and 14:3) without the letter מ.
Law of Separation
The Torah (Leviticus 13:46) states that an Israelite afflicted with tzaraat must reside out of the camp which does not apply when contracting other forms of impurity. Specifically the verse says, “All the days the affliction is upon him … he shall dwell isolated … outside the camp. Maimonides (Laws of the Temple 7:13) based upon the Mishna in Keilim 1:7 explains that the one afflicted with tzaraat cannot reside in a walled city in Israel, including Jerusalem even on the pilgrim festivals, until cured of his affliction.
The Talmud (Arachin 16b) remarks on this verse (ibid. 13:46), “He caused separation between husband and wife (by his gossip) therefore he shall dwell isolated and outside the camp (i.e. away from people).” If the need for separation were only medical to prevent spread of the disease it would have been sufficient to be outside the camp with others afflicted with tzaraat. The dwelling alone prevents the spread of gossip and allows the afflicted to reflect on his actions and return to Hashem.
Purification Rite
The Torah (Leviticus 14:4-7) prescribes a detailed purification rite after the one afflicted with tzaraat has recovered involving two kosher birds, a stick of cedar, strip of crimson wool, and branch of hyssop (ibid. 4). One bird is slaughtered and its blood mixed with water (ibid. 5). The priest then takes the live bird, cedar, crimson wool, and hyssop and dips them into the blood-water mixture (ibid. 6) to sprinkle upon the patient 7 times (ibid.7). Afterwards the live bird is sent to freedom (ibid. 7).
This purification rite is unique in the Torah because it involves live animals outside the temple. By contrast other forms of purification use animals slaughtered in the temple (Leviticus 15:14-15) or a burnt mixture of a slaughtered red cow, cedar, wool, and hyssop mixture outside the temple (Numbers 19:6). In addition the Torah specifies only a turtledove or young pigeon for any of the bird offerings (Leviticus 1:14). In this case of purification any flying kosher bird is valid.
The Talmud remarks (Arachin 16b), “Why does the Torah command birds for this purification.” The Talmud (ibid.) answers, “Since the one afflicted with tzaraat sinned with an act of speech, therefore the Torah says to bring an offering of birds that chirp.”
Sins from Scripture – (Murder, Vain Oaths, Illicit relations, and Haughtiness)
Scripture has clearly indicated these 4 sins as discussed above.
Theft
In reference to theft, the Talmud (ibid.) quotes Leviticus 14:36, “The priest shall command (the owner of the house) to clear out the house, before the priest examines the affliction, to avoid everything in the house from becoming impure.” By clearing out the house, the movables of the householder are now exposed to the public which allows them to recognize potentially stolen items. From Torah law, the householder is not required to remove the objects from his house. Rather, the Torah is giving practical advice to remove these objects to avoid potential impurity because a house with a recognized affliction when declared by the priest, renders all movable items impure. If the householder does not heed the advice of the Torah he will have to immerse his utensils in a ritual bath if he wants to purify them. The Torah allows one to use impure vessels except for partaking of food which is holy (e.g. sacrificial offerings). In addition, since earthenware vessels cannot attain purity through a ritual bath the loss of not removing the utensils from the house is minimal (Rashi on Leviticus 14:36 based on Sifra 5:12). If the householder does not follow the advice of the Torah to remove items from his house he will incur the suspicion of his neighbours who will now think that he is purposely avoiding public scrutiny implying that he is a thief. Hence either way, by removing the items from the house or by keeping them in the house, the person is exposed as a thief through this affliction.
Stinginess
In a similar vein, the Talmud notes that when a person removes items from his house people will realize his stinginess. In the past he may have refused to lend these items claiming that he did not have them. When he removes them from his house his stinginess is revealed to all. The Talmud finds an allusion in the verse (Leviticus 14:35), “The one to whom the house belongs comes and tells the priest: Something like an affliction has appeared in the house,” implying that the house and its items belong exclusively to the owner and not shared by anyone else.
Midrash (Leviticus Rabbah 17:3) – 10 Sins
This Midrash lists 10 sins which may lead to tzaraat as shown in the following table which lists the sins and associated verses.
| Sin | Verse |
| Idolatry | Exodus 32:25 |
| Illicit Relations | Isaiah 3:16-17 |
| Murder | 2 Samuel 3:29 |
| Desecration of Hashem’s Name | 2 Kings 5:23 and 5:27 |
| Blasphemy | 1 Samuel 17:45-46 |
| Theft of the Public | Isaiah 22:15 |
| Usurping Authority | 2 Chronicles 26:16 and 19 |
| Haughtiness | 2 Chronicles 26:16 and 19 |
| Derogatory Speech | Numbers 12:1 and 10 |
| Stinginess | Leviticus 14:35 |
In contrast to the Talmud, the Midrash lists the sins in decreasing order of severity starting with the 3 cardinal sins (i.e. idolatry, illicit relations, and murder). The Talmud does not include idolatry in its list of 7 sins that may lead to tzaraat.
Idolatry
The Midrash finds an allusion linking the incident of the Golden Calf (i.e. idolatry) to tzaraat through a word association of the same verb (פרע), as follows:
Exodus 32:25 – “Moses saw that the people (i.e. Israelites after the Golden Calf) were exposed (פרע), for Aaron had exposed (פרעה) them to be disgraced before their adversaries.”
Leviticus 13:45 – “The person with tzaraat … shall have his garments torn and his head unshorn (פרוע).”
The common verb implies that Hashem withdrew his protection after the sin of idolatry leaving them exposed to tzaraat.
Illicit Relations
In contrast to the Talmud, the Midrash chooses verses from Isaiah to link enticement of illicit relations to tzaraat. In the opinion of the author, the Talmud selects the incident of Pharaoh (a gentile) with Sarah (an Israelite) as an example of improper behaviour because the verse clearly indicates the plague of tzaraat. The Midrash focuses on a verse from Isaiah because both male and female participants are Israelites even though the word association is not as direct. The verses follow:
Isaiah 3:16 – “Hashem said: The daughters of Zion are so haughty. They walk with neck stretched forth and winking eyes. With their feet they spout venom.”
Isaiah 3:17 – “(As a result of their enticement to sin) the Lord shall smite (ושפח) the daughters of Zion with tzaraat.”
The Midrash (Leviticus Rabbah 16:1) explains that the daughters of Zion would entice young men of Israel to sin through flirtatious behaviour. For example they would wear showy jewelry and suggestive makeup. In addition the women would place fragrance in a pouch under their heel and stomp on the pouch when they encountered men. The Midrash establishes a link to tzaraat through the word ושפח (smite) which is similar in pronunciation to the word ספחת (a form of tzaraat) as in Leviticus 13:2.
Murder
Similar to the Talmud, the Midrash (Leviticus Rabbah 17:3) chooses the example of Joab to link murder to tzaraat based upon 2 Samuel 3:29. In contrast to the Talmud, another Midrash (Leviticus Rabbah 16:1) quotes 1 Kings 2:32, “Hashem shall return his (Joab’s) blood upon his own head because he (Joab) fell upon two righteous men … and slew them with the sword” to show that King David was justified in cursing Joab with tzaraat.
Desecration of Hashem’s Name
Similar to the Talmud, the Midrash (Leviticus Rabbah 17:3) chooses the example of Gehazi as another cause of tzaraat. In contrast to the Talmud which identifies Gehazi’s sin as a vain oath, the Midrash identifies this sin as a desecration of Hashem’s name by reducing the miraculous recovery to an opportunity for profit and thereby tarnishing the reputation of Elisha.
Blasphemy
The Midrash chooses the example of Goliath, who cursed Hashem before battling with David, as the verse relates (1 Samuel 17:43), “The Philistine (Goliath) cursed David by his god.” Although the verse implies that Goliath cursed David by the god of the Philistines, the Midrash interprets the verse as Goliath cursing Hashem because David represents the Israelites as a servant of Hashem. The following verse states (ibid. 17:45), “David said to the Philistine: “You come to me with sword, spear and javelin. However I come to you with the Name of the Hashem of Hosts, the G-d of the armies of Israel which you have taunted.” The Midrash understands that Hashem struck Goliath with tzaraat based upon a word association between the following verse (ibid. 17:46), “This day, Hashem will deliver you (Goliath) יסגרך into my hand (David)” and Leviticus 13:5, “The priest shall quarantine him (literally close him up) והסגירו (i.e. the one with tzaraat) for seven days.” Both verses use the same root verb סגר (close) albeit in different meanings (i.e. deliver or quarantine). In addition to the word association, the commentators on the Midrash note that scripture could have used a different verb in the former verse (e.g. מסר – transfer or נתן – give) instead of סגר thereby alluding to tzaraat. In fact the following verse (ibid. 17:47) uses the root נתן – give as follows, “For the battle is to Hashem and He (Hashem) will deliver (ונתן) you (Philistines) into our hands.”
Theft of the Public
The Midrash (ibid.) chooses the example of Shebna to show that theft of the public may lead to tzaraat. The Midrash (Leviticus Rabbah 5:5) identifies Shebna as either a high priest or head administrator of the temple based upon Isaiah 22:15, “Shebna, who is appointed over the Temple.” He abused his position, either by taking excessive amounts of the offerings or actually embezzling temple funds. As a result of his theft Hashem punished him with tzaraat. Although the verse does not explicitly mention tzaraat the Midrash finds an allusion to this affliction through a word association based on the root עטה to wrap or cover. Isaiah cursed Shebna for his misdeeds (ibid. 22:17), “Behold, Hashem shall cast you about with a mighty toss, and cause you to fly or be wrapped up (i.e. sidelined) ועטך עטה . The Midrash (ibid.) then quotes Leviticus 13:45, “On his upper lip he (i.e. one afflicted with tzaraat) shall wrap יעטה himself.” Since the verse uses the same verb the Midrash concludes that Hashem afflicted Shebna with tzaraat.
The reader may ask, “Why did the Talmud not mention the sin of Shebna in its list of 7 sins as discussed above especially since the Talmud (Sanherdin 26a) describes the failings of Shebna?” The commentators on the Midrash and Talmud explain that Shebna’s sins are included in the above list. Specifically the Talmud (ibid.) mentions that Shebna rebelled against King Hezekiah, with the intention of usurping the throne. He planned to make peace with Sennacherib King of Assyria against the instruction of the prophet Isaiah. Hence Shebna was guilty of two of the 7 sins listed by the Talmud:
- Derogatory speech – by planning to make peace, Shebna slandered the Israelites implying that they lacked faith to trust in Hashem and His prophet Isaiah. In addition he created a division amongst the Israelites (Sanhedrin 110a).
- Haughtiness – by thinking that he was fit to become king contrary to the prophecy of Isaiah (22:16) (Iyun Yaakov on Sanhedrin 26a).
Usurping Authority
The Midrash uses the example of King Uzziah to demonstrate that usurping authority may lead to tzaraat. Specifically he acted as a priest by trying to offer incense in the temple which lead to his tzaraat, based upon 2 Chronicles 26:16 (usurping authority) and 26:19 (outbreak of tzaraat). The Talmud did not mention usurping authority as one of the 7 sins of tzaraat because the Talmud uses Uzziah as an example of haughtiness which is similar.
Haughtiness
Similar to the Talmud, the Midrash uses the example of King Uzziah to demonstrate that haughtiness may lead to tzaraat as the verse says (ibid. 26:16), “When he (Uzziah) became strong, his heart became haughty until he became corrupt. Then he trespassed against Hashem … and came into the Temple of Hashem to burn incense on the altar of incense.”
Derogatory Speech
The Midrash uses the example of Miriam as discussed in the section of “Literal Meaning” with the same verses (i.e. Numbers 12:1 and 10).
Stinginess
Similar to the Talmud, the Midrash quotes Leviticus 14:35 to show that stinginess may lead to tzaraat as explained above.
Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 7:5) – 12 Sins
The Midrash in Numbers Rabbah 7:5 lists 12 sins that may lead to tzaraat as shown in the following table which lists the sins and associated verses. Rabbi Yehudah the Levite lists 11 of these sins and Rabbi Yitzchak adds stinginess.
| Sin | Verse |
| Blasphemy | 1 Samuel 17:26 and 46 |
| Illicit Relations | Isaiah 3:16-17 |
| Murder | 2 Samuel 3:29 |
| Derogatory Speech – Accusation | Exodus 4:6 |
| Haughtiness | 2 Kings 5:1 |
| Usurping Authority | 2 Chronicles 26:16 and 19 |
| Derogatory Speech – Lie | Numbers 12:1 and 10 |
| Theft | Zachariah 5:4 |
| False Oath | Zachariah 5:4 |
| Desecration of Hashem’s Name | 2 Kings 5:23 and 5:27 |
| Idolatry | Exodus 32:25 |
| Stinginess | Leviticus 14:35 |
Blasphemy
Similar to the Midrash in Leviticus, this Midrash chooses the example of Goliath who cursed Hashem before battling with David. However this Midrash uses a different verse (1 Samuel 17:26), “David said to the men who were standing before him, saying: … for who is this uncircumcised Philistine, that he should taunt the ranks of the living G-d?” The Midrash uses the same word association between Leviticus 14:35 and 1 Samuel 17:46 to link to tzaraat. This Midrash chooses verse 26 because it clearly states that Goliath taunted Hashem. By contrast the former Midrash quoted verse 45 which is close to verse 46 to maintain context even though the verse only infers that Goliath taunted Hashem.
Illicit Relations
Similar to the former Midrash, this Midrash chooses verses from Isaiah chapter 3 to link enticement of illicit relations to tzaraat.
Murder
Similar to the former Midrash, this Midrash chooses the example of Joab to link murder to tzaraat. In addition this Midrash uses the example of Cain to connect murder to tzaraat through a word association. The Torah states that Hashem placed a sign upon Cain (Genesis 4:15) after he killed his brother Abel. When King Hezekiah became ill (2 Kings 20:1) a boil appeared on his skin (ibid. 7) similar to tzaraat. Isaiah assured him that he would be healed and Hezekiah asked for a sign of his recovery (ibid. 8). The Midrash links the sign of Hezekiah to that of Cain and the boil to tzaarat implying that Cain was afflicted with tzaraat, thereby linking tzaraat to murder.
Derogatory Speech – Accusation
As explained in the Section “Literal Meaning”, when Moses imputed that the Israelites would not believe that Hashem had commanded Moses to rescue the Israelites from Egypt (Exodus 4:1), Hashem struck Moses with tzaraat (ibid 4:6). In this case the derogatory speech is an accusation because Moses could not be sure that the Israelites would not believe him since he had not seen them for many years. In fact they did believe him as the verse (ibid. 4:31) states, “The people (Israelites) believed … that Hashem had remembered the children of Israel … and they (Israelites) kneeled and prostrated themselves.”
Haughtiness
In contrast to the previous Midrash, this Midrash uses the example of Naaman to link tzaraat to haughtiness. The Midrash quotes 2 Kings 5:1, “Naaman, the general of the king of Aram, was a great man before his lord … for through him Hashem had given victory to Aram. Even though he was a great warrior, he was a metzora.” The Midrash comments since he was great in his own eyes Hashem afflicted him with tzaraat.
Usurping Authority
Similar to the above Midrash, this Midrash uses the example of King Uzziah to demonstrate that usurping authority, in this case acting as a priest to offer incense in the temple may lead to tzaraat.
Derogatory Speech – Lie
Similar to the above Midrash, this Midrash uses the example of Miriam for derogatory speech that entails a lie as discussed in the section of “Literal Meaning” with the same verses (i.e. Numbers 12:1 and 10). Miriam erred by comparing her status as a prophet to Moses which is incorrect because the Torah attests that Moses was unique, for Hashem speaks to other prophets through a vision or a dream (ibid. 12:6). By contrast Hashem speaks directly to Moses (ibid. 12:8). Therefore Hashem reprimands Miriam (ibid.), “So why were you not afraid to speak against My (divine) servant Moses?”
Theft
Similar to the Talmud, this Midrash identifies theft as a cause of tzaraat even when the stolen goods are not revealed to the public. By contrast the Talmud indicates that by clearing the house before the priest arrives the crime of theft is exposed. The Midrash emphasizes that the sin of theft itself may lead to destruction of the house as the prophet warns (Zachariah 5:4), “It (divine retribution) shall come into the house of the thief and into the house of him that swears in My Name falsely. It shall lodge in the midst of his house and destroy him, his wood, and stones.” The Midrash then quotes Leviticus 14:45, “He shall demolish the house, its stones, its wood, and its mortar (after the priest has declared the affliction of tzaraat).”
False Oath
The Midrash uses the same verse in Zachariah (ibid. 5:4) for one who swears falsely, “It (divine retribution) shall come into the house of the thief and into the house of him that swears in My Name falsely. “ Since a thief may swear falsely to cover his crime the Midrash links a false oath to tzaraat.
Desecration of Hashem’s Name
Similar to the above Midrash, this Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 7:5) chooses the example of Gehazi to prove that desecration of the name of Hashem may lead to tzaraat. By taking a gift Naaman reduced the miraculous recovery to an opportunity for profit and tarnished the reputation of Elisha leading to a desecration of the name of Hashem.
Idolatry
The Midrash finds an allusion between the incident of the Golden Calf (i.e. idolatry) and tzaraat through a word association of the same verb (פרע) as shown above in the former Midrash (first sin) between Exodus 32:25 and Leviticus 13:45.
Stinginess (Evil eye)
Similar to the Talmud, the Midrash quotes Leviticus 14:35 to show that stinginess may lead to tzaraat as explained above.
Midrash Tanchuma (Parshat Metzora 4) -14 Sins
This Midrash lists 11 primary sins that may lead to tzaraat as shown in the following table which lists these sins and associated verses.
| Sin | Verse |
| Idolatry | Exodus 32:25 |
| Blasphemy (Cursing Hashem) | 1 Samuel 17:8 and 46 |
| Illicit Relations | Isaiah 3:16-17 |
| Theft | Zachariah 5:4 |
| Derogatory Speech – Lie | Numbers 12:1 and 10 |
| False Testimony | Exodus 32:4 |
| Corruption of Justice | Isaiah 5:24 |
| Vain Oath | Zachariah 5:4 |
| Usurping Authority | 2 Chronicles 26:16 and 19 |
| Bad thoughts | N/A |
| Creating Strife | Genesis 12:17 |
In addition to the 11 primary sins the Midrash adds the following:
| Sin | Verse |
| Stinginess (Evil eye) | Job 20:28 |
| Haughtiness | 2 Kings 5:1 |
| Derogatory Speech – Accusation | Exodus 4:6 |
Since this list is similar to the above Midrash the author will only comment where this Midrash differs from the above sources or provides additional explanation.
Blasphemy
The Midrash chooses 1 Samuel 17:8 to indicate that Goliath blasphemed Hashem, “Choose for you a man (איש), and let him come down to me.” Goliath implied that this man was a representative of Hashem based upon the verse (Exodus 15:2), “Hashem is a Master (literally man -איש) of war.”
Illicit Relations
Similar to the above Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 7:5), this Midrash cites Isaiah 3:17 as an example of illicit relations leading to tzaraat. This Midrash establishes a link to tzaraat through the word ושפח (smite) in Isaiah 3:17 which is similar in pronunciation to the word ספחת form of tzaraat in Leviticus 14:55. By contrast the above Midrash quotes Leviticus 13:2 for the word ספחת.
False Testimony
In addition to the sin of idolatry, this Midrash identifies false testimony as a cause of tzaraat based upon the incident of the golden calf. The Torah (Exodus 32:4) records that the enticers to idolatry said, “These are your (false) gods, O Israel, who have brought you up from the land of Egypt”, which represents false testimony. In turn Hashem commanded Moses (Numbers 5:2), “To banish from the camp all those afflicted with tzaraat” and so it happened (ibid. 5:4).
Corruption of Justice
The Midrash finds a word association with the word sprouting (root verb פרח) as follows:
Leviticus 13:12 – “If the tzaraat spreads (פרוח) over the skin … the priest shall examine the patient.”
Isaiah 5:24 – “Therefore, as a flame of fire consumes stubble, and flame shrivels straw, their root shall be like rot, and their greatness (literally blossom (ופרחם)) shall go up like dust. For they have rejected the law of the L-rd of Hosts and the word of the Holy One of Israel they have despised.”
The previous verse (ibid. 5:23) clearly speaks of corrupt judges, “Those who exonerate the guilty for a bribe and take away from the innocent.”
Bad Thoughts
The Midrash does not provide a supporting verse for this sin.
Creating Strife
In addition to Pharaoh’s intent for illicit relations, this Midrash adds the sin of creating strife between husband and wife.
Stinginess (Evil eye)
Similar to the Talmud, the Midrash links stinginess to tzaraat as explained above. However this Midrash quotes Job 20:28 instead of Leviticus 14:35. The former verse reads, “The produce of his house (i.e. his belongings) shall go into exile (will be revealed to the public) … on the day of His (divine) wrath.” In addition this Midrash expounds the words “deep streaks” on the afflicted house שקערורת (Leviticus 15:37) as two words by adding the silent letter aleph to obtain ארורת שקע which means submerged in curses reflecting divine wrath.
Zohar (3:206a) -12 Sins
Similar to the Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 7:5), the Zohar (ibid.) lists 11 primary sins that may lead to tzaraat as shown in the following table which lists the sins and associated verses. The Zohar includes the “evil eye” as a 12th cause for tzaraat. For 3 of these 12 sins the Zohar does not provide a supporting verse.
| Sin | Verse |
| Idolatry | Exodus 32:25 |
| Blasphemy | 1 Samuel 17:46 |
| Illicit Relations | Isaiah 3:16-17 |
| Theft | Zachariah 5:4 |
| Derogatory Speech – Lie | Numbers 12:1 and 10 |
| False Testimony | Exodus 32:4 and 17 |
| Corruption of Justice | Isaiah 5:24 |
| Vain Oath | N/A |
| Usurping Authority | 2 Chronicles 26:16 and 19 |
| Bad thoughts | N/A |
| Creating Strife | Genesis 12:17 |
| Evil eye | N/A |
Since this list is similar to the above Midrash the author will only comment where the Zohar differs from the Midrash or provides additional explanation. It is interesting to note that this list is identical to that above in terms of these 12 sins, their order, and where applicable related verses.
Blasphemy
The Zohar comments that David looked at Goliath with reproach which led to tzaraat.
False Testimony
Similar to the above Midrash, the Zohar identifies false testimony as a cause of tzaraat based upon the incident of the golden calf. The Torah (Exodus 32:4) records that the enticers to idolatry said, “These are your (false) gods, O Israel, who have brought you up from the land of Egypt”, which represents false testimony. The Zohar links this declaration to tzaraat through a word association of “camp”. The Torah states (Exodus 32:17) that the Israelites, were shouting in the camp and Joshua said to Moses: “There is a voice of battle in the camp!” In reality it was a shouting of idolatry and immorality. In turn Hashem commanded Moses (Numbers 5:2), “To banish from the camp all those afflicted with tzaraat” and so it happened (ibid. 5:4), “They sent them outside the camp.” Since the camp of the Israelites must be holy (Deuteronomy 23:15) Hashem may afflict some Israelites if they depart from the path of holiness.
Creating Strife
In addition to Pharaoh’s intent for illicit relations, the Zohar adds the sin of creating strife between husband and wife. The modern commentary on the Zohar מתוק מדבש by Rabbi Daniel Paris explains that Sarah may have complained to Abraham about his scheme by saying that Sarah was only his sister instead of his wife (Genesis 12:13).
Looking with reproach
In addition to blasphemy which made Goliath susceptible to tzaraat, David looked at Goliath with reproach (literally evil eye) which hastened the tzaraat.
It is interesting to note that the Zohar does not quote verses for the sins of vain oaths, bad thoughts, and evil eye.
Numerology
The commentary on the Zohar (ibid.) מדבש מתוק explains the significance of the number 11 as follows:
- 11 ingredients in the incense used for the temple (Talmud Keritot 6a).
- 11 curtains of goat hair for the Tabernacle (Exodus 26:7).
- 11 specific curses for transgressors (Deuteronomy 27:15-25).
- 11 levels of divine connection with the world (i.e. 10 sefirot plus Hashem).
Each of these factors relates to the cause or atonement of tzaraat. As explained below, incense atones for the sin of derogatory speech in private where the effect of the speech was minimal. The Tabernacle provides a means of atonement for the Israelites. Some of the 11 sins listed in Deuteronomy 27:15-25 are also mentioned in the Midrash and Zohar as causes for tzaraat (e.g. idolatry 27:15, theft 27:17, illicit relations 27:20-24, and murder 27:25). The 11 levels of divine connection relate to the corrective action of tzaraat as explained below in terms of the role of man (אדם).
Comparison of Sources
After completing the listing and description of the causes of tzaraat the author will compare and contrast the different approaches of these 3 sources in term o causes:
- Selection.
- Order.
This comparison may be extended to include the sources of Midrash Tanchuma (Pashat Metzora 4) and the Zohar (3:206a). For the sake of brevity and consistency (i.e. compare similar sources) the author will limit this discussion to the above 3 sources.
| Cause (sin) | Talmud Arachin 16a | Leviticus Rabbah 17:3 | Numbers Rabbah 7:5 |
| Derogatory speech | √ | √ | √ |
| Murder | √ | √ | √ |
| Vain oaths | √ | √ (Desecration of Hashem’s Name) | √ |
| Illicit relations | √ | √ | √ |
| Haughtiness | √ | √ | √ |
| Theft | √ | √ | √ |
| Stinginess | √ | √ | √ |
| Idolatry | X | √ | √ |
| Desecration of Hashem’s Name | √ (Vain Oath) | √ | √ |
| Blasphemy | X | √ | √ |
| Usurping Authority | √ (Haughtiness) | √ | √ |
| Accusation | X | X | √ |
Selection of Causes
As seen from the above table, there are many causes of tzaraat with different methods of classification. For example both the Talmud and Midrash refer to King Uzziah who wished to serve as a priest. The Talmud refers to this sin as haughtiness while the Midrash refers to this sin as usurping authority. In addition both the Talmud and Midrash refer to the sin of Gehazi who took gifts from Naaman without the permission of his master Elisha. The Talmud refers to this as a vain oath while the Midrash refers to this sin as desecration of Hashem’s name. The Talmud did not mention the sins of idolatry (i.e. golden calf), blasphemy (i.e. Goliath), or false accusation (i.e. Moses) perhaps because these sins are not as likely causes of tzaraat as the other sins listed in the Talmud.
Order of Causes
Although the Talmud (ibid.) did not explain the order of the 7 sins, Maimonides (Laws of Tzaraat 16:10) writes that the derogatory speech is the primary cause of tzaraat. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that the Talmud follows the likely causes of tzaraat in its order.
The Midrash (Leviticus Rabbah 17:3) lists the 3 cardinal sins (i.e. idolatry, illicit relations, and murder) at the beginning of its list of 10 sins thus following the severity of the sin.
The order of the latter Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 7:5) is more difficult to explain since it does seem to follow neither the likely occurrence nor severity of the sin.
Divine Justice
The reader may ask, “What other forms of divine justice apply to sins that lead to tzaraat?” The Talmud Arachin (16a) answers this question and considers these forms of divine justice with respect to tzaraat:
- Vestments of high priest.
- Offerings or ceremonies
Vestments of High Priest
The high priest wears 8 priestly vestments when performing his duties in the temple. The Talmud (ibid.) states that each of these vestments atones for specific sins which may overlap with causes of tzaraat. The following table lists the vestments, atonement of sin, and overlap with the causes of tzaraat based upon the Talmud (ibid.) and Midrash (Leviticus Rabbah 17:3 and Numbers 7:5).
| Vestment | Sin | Overlap |
| Tunic | Murder | √ |
| Trousers | Illicit Relations | √ |
| Turban | Haughtiness | √ |
| Belt | Improper thoughts of heart | X (Note 1) |
| Breastplate | Miscarriage of justice | X (Note 1) |
| Apron (Ephod -אפוד) | Idolatry | √ |
| Robe (Meil – מעיל) | Derogatory Speech | √ |
| Head plate | Brazenness | X (Note 2) |
Note 1: The Zohar lists these sins as a potential cause of tzaraat.
Note 2: Although not mentioned in the above sources the sin of brazenness could be included in haughtiness.
The Talmud links the vestment to a particular sin through its location or purpose (i.e. form and function) or a word association. In the case of overlap the following table lists the vestment, related verse in chapter 28 of Exodus, and nature of the association and where applicable a related verse.
| Vestment | Verse | Association |
| Tunic | 39 | Word – Genesis 37:31 |
| Trousers | 42 | Location – cover genitals |
| Apron | 6 | Idolatry – Hosea 3:4 |
| Robe | 33-35 | Form – Bells that make sounds |
| Head plate | 38 | Word – Jeremiah 3:3 |
The following paragraphs will explain the link of a particular sin to the priestly vestments as follows:
Tunic
The Talmud finds an allusion to murder through a word association involving the sale of Joseph. His brothers attempted to convince their father that Joseph was killed by a wild animal. Therefore they slaughtered a goat and dipped his tunic in its blood as the verse states (Genesis 37:31), “They took Joseph’s tunic, slaughtered a goat, and dipped the coat in its blood.” Although Joseph was not actually killed the word association between tunic and murder applies at the Torah level of interpretation of “Hints and Allusion – רמז”.
Trousers
The association between trousers and illicit relations is based upon the location of the trousers as the verse states (Exodus 28:42), “Make for the priests linen trousers to cover their nakedness (i.e. genitals).”
Apron
The Talmud finds an allusion to idolatry through a word association based upon Hosea 3:4, “For the children of Israel shall remain for many days, having neither king, nor prince, nor sacrifice, nor pillar, nor ephod (apron), nor teraphim (idolatrous images).” Laban, the father in law of Jacob possessed teraphim which Rachel stole to prevent her father from worshipping them (Midrash Genesis Rabbah 74:5 on Genesis 31:19). Others explain that Laban used the teraphim to predict the future. In any event the Talmud links ephod to idolatry.
Robe
The Talmud links the robe with its bells to the sin of derogatory speech. The Torah mentions that gold bells were fasted to the hem of the tunic which made sounds when the high priest walked (Exodus 28:33-35). The Talmud (ibid.) states “Let the bells that make a sound atone for the sound of derogatory speech.”
Head Plate (מצח)
The Talmud finds an allusion to brazenness through a word association (מצח) based upon Jeremiah 3:3 where he chastises the Israelites for their lack of observance, “The rains were withheld because you had a harlot’s forehead מצח (i.e. brazenness) and refused to be ashamed.” The Torah uses the same word for the head plate in Exodus 28:38.
Summary
The Talmud directly addresses overlap of derogatory speech (i.e. tzaraat vs.tunic) and answers that Hashem may afflict a person with tzaraat if the derogatory speech actually harmed the victim. Otherwise the tunic provides atonement based upon its form and function. Rashi (ibid.) notes that the Talmud did not address the other overlapping sins mentioned by the Talmud (i.e. murder and illicit relations). He explains that the priestly vestments only atone for these sins on a communal basis and therefore do not absolve an individual sinner from the affliction of tzaraat. This reasoning will apply to the other overlapping sins mentioned in the Midrash (i.e. haughtiness and idolatry).
Offerings or ceremonies
The Talmud (ibid.) notes that although the Torah does not mention an offering for sins of murder and derogatory speech, Hashem provides other means of atonement as follows:
- Murder – decapitated calf (Deuteronomy 21:1-9).
- Derogatory speech – incense (Numbers 17:12)
Murder – Decapitated Calf
The Torah records a ceremony when a murder has been committed without witnesses. The elders of the nearest city perform a public ritual involving a decapitated calf and a declaration that they were not negligent in this case. This ceremony only provides atonement for the community. However if the murderer is found then the court will take appropriate action after a thorough investigation and trial.
Incense
When the temple was functioning in Jerusalem, the officiating priest offered incense twice daily. The Talmud (ibid.) explains that since the incense is offered in private (i.e. burnt inside the Sanctuary) it will atone for an action generally performed in private (i.e. derogatory speech).
Method of Atonement
Hence the Talmud (ibid.) questions, “If these offerings or ceremonies atone, what role is played by the priestly vestments?” The Talmud answers that the tunic atones for the community if the murderer is known but not properly warned. By contrast the ceremony of the decapitated calf provides a communal atonement when the murderer is not known. Similarly the robe with the bells atones if the derogatory speech was in public. By contrast incense atones if the derogatory speech was in private. In both of these cases the atonement applies when derogatory speech did not have a significant affect. Otherwise Hashem may afflict the offender with tzaraat.
Historical Context
The Midrash (Leviticus Rabbah 18:3) establishes an historical context for the affliction of tzaraat. After receiving the Torah the Israelites were in a protected spiritual state and free from:
- Untimely death.
- Persecution from other nations.
- Afflictions including tzaraat.
This Midrash links these freedoms to the tablets that Moses received from Hashem as the verse states (Exodus 32:16), “The tablets were G-d’s work, and the inscription was G-d’s inscription, engraved חרות on the tablets.” The Hebrew word engraved (חרות) without vowels may also be read as חרות (freedom). In addition the verse literally reads “engraved on the tablets” while the meaning is “engraved in the tablets.”Hence this expression may be interpreted as freedom because of the tablets with the word על meaning “because of”.
The reader may ask, “If the Israelites were freed from afflictions why does the Torah command (Numbers 5:2): To send out from the camp all those afflicted with tzaraat?” The Midrash (Leviticus Rabbah 18:4) explains that after the Israelites sinned at the golden calf Hashem removed this protection. Consequently they were susceptible to tzaraat if they sinned, especially through the sin of derogatory speech. In fact this Midrash indentifies some of these sins as follows:
- After idolatry of the golden calf (Exodus 32:25).
- Speaking ill of the Ark which could lead to the death of the Levites if handled improperly (Numbers 4:20).
- Complaining about lack of meat in the wilderness (Numbers 11:4 and 20).
- Speaking ill of Aaron and Miriam who were afflicted with tzaraat (Numbers 12:9-10).
Severity of Sin
The Midrash (Leviticus Rabbah 16:6) indicates the severity of evil speech by noting that the Torah uses the expression “Torah of” תורת 4 times when discussing the laws of tzaraat (viz. Leviticus 13:59, 14:2, 14:32, and 14:57) and once more the expression “the Torah” התורה (viz. ibid. 14:54) for a total of 5 times. The Midrash concludes that one who engages in evil speech has transgressed in a homiletic sense the 5 books of Moses.
Secrets of the Torah – סוד
Rehabilitation – Relationship with Hashem
The Zohar focuses on the relation between Hashem and the Israelites when discussing susceptibility to tzaraat. The Zohar (3:47a) notes that the Torah introduces the subject of tzaraat with the word אדם man (Leviticus 13:2), “If a man (אדם) has … a lesion of tzaraat on his skin.” The Zohar also remarks that this term for man is the highest of the 4 biblical terms for mankind (viz. אנוש ,גבר, איש, אדם). Hence the Zohar raises the question, “Why does the Torah use the highest form of expression for man to discuss the disfiguring affliction of tzaraat?” The Zohar answers that this affliction is not primarily punitive. Rather it is corrective in that man should improve his ways and return to Hashem. Hence Hashem who has such high expectations for man will afflict him with tzaraat to realize his divine potential as a father who disciplines his son out of love and not out of revenge as the verse states (Deuteronomy 8:5), “Just as a man chastises his son so does Hashem chastise you.”
In a similar vein, The Midrash Tanchuma (Parshat Tazria 7) notes that many of the laws in the book of Leviticus are introduced by the expression, “Speak to the Children of Israel”. However in the case of tzaraat this expression is not used at all. This Midrash concludes that this omission indicates that Hashem does not desire to punish the Israelites as a result of their sins. Rather the punishment is a corrective action which will lead the Israelites to abandon their sinful ways and return to Hashem as the verse states (Ezekiel 18:32), “For I (Hashem) do not desire the death of him who sins (literally destined to death) … so turn away (from sin) and live!”
The word man (אדם) has the following significances:
- Physical being – created from the earth.
- Creative potential – link to the Hebrew word for ‘very” (מאד).
- Divine soul – same gematria as the Tetragrammaton in full (45).
Physical being
The Midrash (Genesis Rabbah 17:4) comments that in addition to Adam naming the animals Genesis 2:20, he even named himself as Adam (man אדם) because he was created from the earth (אדמה). This Midrash acknowledges man’s physical and earthy nature which if left uncontrolled will lead to sin. Hence there is a need for divine corrective action (e.g. tzaraat) to put man on the proper path.
Creative Potential
It is interesting to note that the letters of man (אדם) when rearranged spell the word מאד which means “much or very” as in the verse (Genesis 1:31), “Hashem saw all that He had made (in the six days of creation) and behold it was very (מאד) good.” This verse indicates the great potential of man to utilize the resources of the world, as mentioned in Genesis Rabbah 9:12, and not to be squandered in arguments and derogatory speech. The first chapter of Genesis emphasizes man’s mastery of the physical world as Hashem spoke to Adam (Genesis 1:28), “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; rule over the fish of the sea, fowl of the sky, beasts that tread upon the earth.”
The Zohar (3:47a) notes that the Hebrew word צרעת (tzaraat) may be divided into 2 words עת צר indicating a difficult time both for the sufferer and society in general. The tzaraat affliction implies that Hashem is displeased with the sufferer to bring upon him a supernatural disease. By extension this mode of strict divine justice may apply to other individuals that have fallen short of Hashem’s expectations and may suffer similar consequences.
Divine Soul
The gematria of the word man (אדם – 45) corresponds to the gematria of the Tetragrammaton in the milui (full spelling) system as shown below (20+6+13+6 =45). This indicates the divine nature of man’s soul and his great potential in spirituality.
(The milui system of gematria takes each letter in Hebrew and spells it out in full. The table presents the letters of the Tetragrammaton, the spelling in milui form, and associated gematria.)
| Letter | Milui | Gematria |
| י | יוד | 20 |
| ה | הא | 6 |
| ו | ואו | 13 |
| ה | הא | 6 |
It is interesting to note that the first time the Tetragrammaton appears in the Torah is Genesis 2:7 where the Torah speaks of the formation of man in a spiritual sense, “Hashem formed man (האדם) of dust from the ground, breathed into his nostrils the soul of life, and man became a living (spiritual) soul.” Hence the verse links man to his divine soul as indicated by the gematria of 45.
Holiness
The Zohar (3:49b) continues on the theme of holiness by quoting the following verses:
Leviticus 11:44 – “You (Israelites) shall sanctify yourselves to become holy because I (Hashem) am holy.”
Leviticus 20:24 – “I am Hashem Who (divine) has distinguished you from the (idolatrous) peoples.”
Spiritual Strength
The Zohar (3:45b) compares the physical immune system of a person to a spiritual immune system. Just as a healthy person may fight off different viruses, a spiritually strong person will fight off negative forces that make a person susceptible to tzaraat. The Zohar (ibid.) quotes the following verses to bolster this idea:
Psalms 34:14 – “Guard your tongue from evil and your lips from speaking deceitfully.”
Proverbs 21:23 – “He who watches his mouth and tongue guards his soul from troubles.”
Medical Condition
The Midrash Leviticus Rabbah Chapter 15 identifies a number of medical factors that may lead to this affliction. The following table lists the cause, method of exegesis and source in chapter 15.
| Cause | Method | Source |
| Excess blood | Word association | 15:2 |
| Congenital disease | Juxtaposition | 15:5 |
| Sin of parents | Juxtaposition | 15:6 |
Excess blood
The Midrash notes that the section of the Torah dealing with tzaraat begins with the word man or in Hebrew אדם as the verse states (Leviticus 13:2), “If a person אדם will have a lesion on his skin.” The Midrash points out that the word אדם may be separated into 2 words דם או by adding the letter vav ו which means “or blood”. This implies that this disease is related to an imbalance of blood or in medical terminology a blood disorder which makes a person susceptible to tzaraat. In addition Midrash Tanchuma (Parshat Tazria 6) considers the blood imbalance with respect to water (in bodily fluids) as follows:
| Blood | Water | Result |
| Excessive | — | Tzaraat |
| — | Excessive | Sensitive (Weak immune system) |
| Balanced | Balanced | Healthy |
The Midrash (ibid.15:4) adds that if the Israelites observe the mitzvoth Hashem will protect them from this plague as the Torah relates (Exodus 15:26), “If you hearken diligently to the voice of Hashem and … listen to His commandments, and observe His decrees, then any of the diseases that I place upon Egypt I will not bring upon you, for I am Hashem Your healer.”
Congenital Disease
The Midrash (ibid. 15:5) indicates that tzaraat may be a congenital disease if the mother does not observe the laws of separation from her husband after childbirth and menstrual cycle for the following reasons:
- Juxtaposition – the laws of childbirth (Leviticus 13:1-8) immediately precede the laws of tzaraat. From a thematic viewpoint the laws of the menstrual cycle (ibid. 15:19-33) should have followed the laws of childbirth instead of tzaraat because both of these laws involve women and natural reproductive functions. By contrast tzaraat applies to both men and women and is supernatural. Hence the Torah alludes to a connection between the laws of the menstrual cycle and tzaraat.
- Excess blood – Both of these laws involve blood of the mother, which may cause an imbalance in the blood of the child, leading to tzaraat from a medical viewpoint or divine retribution from a theological viewpoint. The Midrash (ibid.) draws an analogy between a mother with excess blood and garden with excess water both leading to defective offspring.
Sin of Parents
The ways of Hashem are deep and the words of the Torah are nuanced. Even though there are several verses in scripture linking tzaraat with sin, the Talmud poses an interesting anomaly where a child, even one day old, may contract tzaraat. The Midrash (ibid. 15:6) understands that tzaraat may develop if the husband does not provide his wife with the necessary funds to buy the sacrificial offerings after childbirth.
Conclusion
This article discussed many causes of tzaraat with the most common being derogatory speech. The author analyzed different approaches of the Talmud, Midrash, and Zohar to appreciate numerous levels of divine judgment and atonement, realizing that divine action is corrective and not punitive. Certainly a person should not attempt to judge a person with a medical condition as the verse (Deuteronomy 29:28) says,” The hidden things (mysteries of life) belong to Hashem. However the revealed things apply to us and to our children forever to fulfill all the words of this Torah.” Rather a person should help another person in need and place his trust in Hashem, the ultimate doctor, as the verse (Exodus 15:26) says, “I (Hashem) am your doctor.”