Tazria. Bris Mila on the Eighth Day. An Excellent Collaboration and דבר תורה לברית מילה

THIS WAS UPDATED ON JULY 25 2021

AFTER A RECAP OF HOW THIS IDEA DEVELOPED AMONG SEVERAL CONTRIBUTORS, YOU WILL FIND A CLEAR AND STRAIGHTFORWARD DESCRIPTION OF THIS DVAR TORAH AS IT SHOULD BE PRESENTED TO AN AUDIENCE. IT IS VERY, VERY, VERY, GOOD.

In last year's post on this parsha, I brought a Medrash (cited by the Taz) that says that the reason Mila is on the eighth day, and the reason an animal cannot be brought as a korban till the eighth day after its birth, is that they must experience the passage of Shabbos.  Only then, only having been elevated by the Kedusha of Shabbos, can they be used in the service of the Ribono shel Olam.

In as perfect an example of stimulating collaboration as one could hope for, the comments that came in developed an outstanding vort.  I had a Medrash, Eli brought up a question on the Medrash, I brought a Chasam Sofer that answers the question but I didn't understand the svara of the Chasam Sofer, then I suggested a possible approach, and great unknown provided a conceptual framework that sheds light upon the entire discussion.  This is how it unfolded, followed by a recap.

Eli wrote...A bit off topic, but this Medrash had me long wondering - why the 8th day. Had Bris been the 7th day, Shabbos would also be always included. If you think that the answer is we need a full 24h Shabbos, think again. What if a baby is born Shabbos afternoon and the Bris is in the morning?
March 31, 2011 11:18 AM

I responded...(.....)The Chasam Sofer in his Teshuvos OC 102, dealing with the opinion (of the Italian Mekubalim) that kiddush levana should be at least seven days after the molad, brings in our Medrash. He addresses your point, and says that evidently, the bris, or the idea of Pnei Matronisa, requires two things: Experiencing the beginning of a Shabbos, and experiencing the end of a Shabbos: כניסת מטרוניתא ויציאת מטרוניתא.
From the formal logic perspective, his answer is fine. From the "why on earth would that make sense" perspective, nu nu.
March 31, 2011 11:52 AM

I added...I was thinking about what I said, that it's hard to see a svara in what the Chasam Sofer said, and here's what occurred to me.
The din of זכרהו בכניסתו וביציאתו, to make some sort of kiddush when Shabbos begins and when it ends, pashtus, is a simple din of kavod- like saluting an honored guest when he arrives and when he leaves. But it is possible that there is one particular kedusha that happens at the onset and another at the conclusion of Shabbos. It's not just Hello and Goodbye.
Even the shittos that hold not like the Rambam, who hold that havdala is entirely miderabanan, don't necessarily disagree with the concept, they just hold that there's no din kiddush on yetzias Shabbos.
March 31, 2011 12:48 PM

 great unknown said...Kenisas HaShabbos signals the categorical distinction of the Jew from the mundane non-Jewish residents of creation. Yetzias HaShabbos signals a lower level of kedusha which involves Jews being involved in the everyday "la'sheves" of the world - while nevertheless being quantitatively superior to the non-Jew in kedusha - ner la'amim if you will.

Both are necessary elements of the Jewish interaction with and purpose in creation.
I am basing this on a brilliant drosho I heard last Succos in KJBS/Chicago, which covered many more details of this dual havdalah.
March 31, 2011 5:36 PM

 Eli said...In the Shalom Zachar of my second, I (unaware of the Chasam Sofer) suggested that the requirement is to experience Shabbos-night davka. This fits nicely with the fact we observe Shalom Zachar Friday night, a time when people are usually not going out (and that specific night was bitterly cold, btw).
I'm sure gu can explain much better than myself why the מטרוניתא aspect of Shabbos is related to the night part and not the day. One pointer is Ramban Shmos 20:7 which I quote verbatim for lack of unerstanding: "ובמדרשו של רבי נחוניא בן הקנה (ספר הבהיר אות קפב): הזכירו עוד סוד גדול בזכור ושמור, ועל הכלל תהיה הזכירה ביום והשמירה בלילה, וזהו מאמר החכמים (ב"ק לב ב): שאומרים בערב שבת באי כלה באי כלה, באו ונצא לקראת שבת מלכה כלה, ויקראו לברכת היום קדושא רבא (פסחים קו א): שהוא הקדוש הגדול, ותבין זה. "
So whatever that means, the feminine aspect of שבת which is called מלכה, i.e. מטרוניתא, relates to the night, not the day.

To complete the Drush I said that we see the feminine aspect of שבת  is related to שמור  and not זכור, i.e. the passive acceptance of Kedusha, as opposed to our active efforts represented by the Zachor part. As we prepare for giving our newborn the message of R. Akiva (Tanchuma Tazria), that his deeds could achieve greater results than those of Hashem, so to speak, we first need to go through the Shamor part, to recall it's all based on the Kedusha we get from above, passively.

April 01, 2011 3:18 AM

UPDATE MAY 5, 2014:
I got an email today from Lakewood Guy, who just made a bris, and he used this Chasam Sofer and added two excellent things:

The meforshim ask why the mitzvah of shmittah is prefaced by shesh shanim tizra...
It is relatively easy to have an awareness of being involved in avodas Hashem during the shana hasheviis. The trick is, maintaining that awareness during the shesh shanim of zeriia.
Here I used your pshat in the medrash/ chasam sofer - the child must experience a motzai shabbos to realize that avodas Hashem is not limited to shabbos but must permeate the sheshes yimai hama'aseh as well.
Bach in hilchos teffilah (O"C 133) Aleinu is said after teffilah to prepare ourselves for dealing with the outside world. Minhag is to say Aleinu after a bris (seemingly even when the bris is not at the end of a teffilah). Same idea, preparing the child for life outside, with an awareness that even the mundane aspects of life need to be a part of ones avodas Hashem.

Organized into one coherent piece:

The Medrash says that a child has to undergo a Shabbos before his bris.  (This is common to many applications in Kodashim: All the original kohanim before their investiture; the Kohen Gadol before Yom Kippur; the kohen that does the Parah Adumah; and, of course, every animal korban.  The Abudraham says that the Bris Milah is really a form of hakravas Korban, so it is just another application of this rule of Kodashim.) 

The Chasam Sofer (Tshuvos OC 102) asks, why do you need to wait for the eighth day?  Even waiting for the seventh day will mean that he saw a Shabbos!  So he explains as follows, modified by me for purposes of speaking to a rabbim: 

 If the purpose of the eight days is to ensure that the baby experience Shabbos, seven days should be good enough. 

·        If  he was born on Shabbos, and the bris is on Friday, he saw Shabbos - he saw the second half, the end, of Shabbos.  

·        If he was born Sunday, and you make the bris on Shabbos morning, he saw Shabbos - he saw the whole beginning of Shabbos, Friday night and the morning before the bris.

·        Do not say that the requirement to wait for the eighth day is because he has to have 24 hours of Shabbos, because if he's born Shabbos afternoon, and the bris is Shabbos morning, he only will have had fourteen hours out of twenty four of Shabbos!  

·        So the Chasam Sofer answers that what the child needs is not 24 hours of Shabbos.  What he needs is to experience the beginning of a Shabbos and the departure of a Shabbos.

 

This answer is difficult to understand.  It answers the question perfectly, but it leaves us with more questions that we began with - explaining something perplexing with an answer that is more perplexing. Why would it matter if the child experiences both the beginning and the end of a Shabbos?  Is there something special about the end of Shabbos? Isn't the beginning enough?

Another question:

Many people say that Tuma comes when Kedusha leaves.  The Shem Mishmuel asks, if so, why is there no tuma when Shabbos ends? 

 

Perhaps the idea of the departure of Shabbos is reflected in the halacha of Havdala.  We are not merely saying goodbye to Shabbos, but instead we are being mekadeish a different type of kedusha, the kedusha of after-Shabbos.  great unknown polished this by saying that the kedusha of Shabbos, which we celebrate in Friday night kiddush, is the kedusha of olam haba, of being above Teva.  The kedusha of Saturday night, the kedusha of Havdala, is the kedusha of living in a world of teva, of working, of interacting with the gentile world, and all through it making the world a holier place.

 

This is why the departure of Shabbos does not result in an influx of Tumah.  Tumah only follows the departure of kedusha when nothing is left behind.  The point of Havdala is that when Shabbos ends, and the kedusha leaves, it leaves some of itself behind to be mekadesh the forthcoming week.  Havdala is a type of kiddush.  

 

 It is those two kedushos that are implicit in the Medrash that are essential to being a Jew.  (See Ksav Sofer at end.)  

 

Perhaps you could say that the beginning of Shabbos is the gift of kedusha, the feminine aspect of Klal Yisrael vis a vis Shabbos, when we receive the gift of Kedusha. On Friday night, we receive kedusha, a kedusha that is the source of all kedusha in this gashmiyuskikkeh world. When Shabbos ends, we experience Shabbos in the masculine aspect; we are told to take what we experienced and apply it in the world of Gashmiyus, we are told to disseminate kedusha.

This reminded me of something that happened in my own extended family.  X was going through a very challenging teen age period, and Y was considering hanging out with him motzei Shabbos, not for kiruv, just to chill out.  One of my sons told Y "The same way you wouldn't be mechallel Shabbos, make sure that you're not mechallel motzei Shabbos."

This idea is perfectly suited for presenting at the Seuda of a Bris.  Targum Yonasan by "Be'cha yevareich Yisrael" says that specifically at the Seudas HaBris Klal Yisrael will bentch their children by saying ישימך אלוקים כאפרים וכמנשה.  It powerfully expresses the two important aspects of what the Bris Millah is supposed to symbolize and to strengthen, of what it means to be an eved Hashem: the kedusha of l'maalah min hateva, and the kedusha of teva.    The Jew of Sheishes yamim ta'aseh me'lachtecha, and the Jew of Shabbos la'Shem Elokecha.   Be a Malach; and Be a Mentsch.

A great talmid chacham to whom I told this said it over in his yeshiva, but he said a different pshat in the Chasam Sofer/Medrash.  He said that the lesson of יציאת מטרוניתא is that a Jew has to be ready for change.  It's relatively easy to maintain a high madreiga during the zman, no matter how long the zman is.  But when Bein Hazmanim comes, not everyone can deal with the change.   A child has to learn that a Jew has to be able to tolerate change, to adjust to what is dealt to him.

 

  The Ksav Sofer in Teshuvos OC 45, here, beginning at the end of the fifteenth line, in his explanation of the Gemara in Pesachim 113a המבדיל על היין במוצ״ש מאי היא דמשייר מקידושא לאבדלתא, says something very similar to our pshat in Havdala, which works so well to explain his father's mehalach.  

 

As far as משייר מקידושא לאבדלתא, the Tur (OC 296) brings this Gemara too. that a person should leave wine over from kiddush and use it for Havdala.  We don't have this minhag, because Tosfos learns the Gemara differently, but the Shulchan Aruch Harav brings it down in OC 271:22.)  In any case, the Tur there is very emphatic about the importance of Havdala and brings strong words to that effect from Pirkei D'Rebbi Eliezer.  

 

AND ADDING LAKEWOOD GUY'S IDEA- 

In parshas Behar, the meforshim ask why the mitzvah of shmittah is prefaced by shesh shanim tizra.

It is relatively easy to have an awareness of being involved in avodas Hashem during the shana hasheviis. The trick is, maintaining that awareness during the shesh shanim of zeriia.

The answer is that we learn from our Chasam Sofer that the lesson of waiting eight days before a Bris Millah is that the child must experience a Motzai Shabbos to realize that avodas Hashem is not limited to Shabbos but must permeate the sheshes yimai hama'aseh as well.

The Bach in hilchos teffilah (O"C 133) says that we say Aleinu after teffilah to prepare ourselves for dealing with the outside world. We also have a minhag to say Aleinu after a bris (seemingly even when the bris is not at the end of a tefilah, and even though we just said Aleinu five minutes ago!). This is the same idea; we are preparing the child to receive kedusha, and we are preparing the child to disseminate the kedusha he received.  We give him a physical mark that imparts the awareness that even the mundane aspects of life need to be a part of ones avodas Hashem.

Tazria, Vayikra 12:3. Bris Mila on the Eigth Day

The Taz (YD 265 SK 13) brings a Medrash that says the reason the Bris Mila is on the eighth day, and the reason one cannot bring an animal sacrifice until eight days after it is born, is that Hashem says "Do not come before me until you have appeared before/seen My Matron."  The "matron" here refers to Shabbos.  The Torah requires the eight day wait to ensure that at least one Shabbos will have passed before the special day.  At my oldest son's bris, Reb Moshe (as partially cited in Kol Rom III p. 395) connected this to the requirement that Aharon and his sons, at their original investiture in the Mishkan,  had seven days of Miluim and could only do the avoda on the eighth day.  Similarly, the Kohen Gadol is relocated from his home to a chamber on the Har Habayis for seven days before Yom Kippur.

What does this Medrash teach us?

1.  Only Hashem can allow us to serve Him, and He does so by stating the manner and granting us the means of doing so. Reb Moshe said that we learn two things: that we cannot invent novel means of serving Hashem.  Hashem can only be served in a manner that He expressly sanctions.  Anything else is "Sh'chutei Chutz," as if we brought a sacrifice outside the Beis Hamikdash, which is a cardinal sin.  The second thing is that we can only approach Hashem after we have been imbued with a special kedusha, and it is only only after going through  Shabbos that is one changed by a kedusha that makes avodas Hashem possible.

2.  Bris Mila is a form of Korban.  That Bris Mila shares certain characteristics of a sacrifice.  Indeed, the Abarbanel says that the bris is a type of Korban.  The reason it is done lechatchila on the eighth day and not later is because every korban needs to be without blemish, physically perfect.  But this korban has less to do with the physical as it does with the spiritual.  Thus, mila should be done on a neshama that is spiritually perfect.  This is best done as soon as possible after birth, before the child has a chance to do what people are wont to do.  Seize the moment when the neshama is still perfect.

3(a)1.  Kedusha that leaves a residual effect elevates us; Kedusha that does not leave a residual effect degrades us.  What does Tumah come from?  Or rather, what brings about Tumah?  The Zohar (see Shem MiShmuel Tazria, years '74-5) says that all Tumah comes from the departure of Kedusha.  The way the Baal Ha'akeida (brought in Malbim "Torah Ohr" beginning of Chukas) puts it is so:

אחר שכל דבד אשר יופסד הוא נתהפך אל הדבר היותר רע, ויותר נמאס, מן השורש הזה נמשכו דיני טומאה, כי המיתה הוא הפסד בעה״ח או הצומח, וכשימות האילן שאין בו רק נפש צומחת, נתהוה ממנו רקב ועפר, ואין בו שום טומאה, אבל כשיופסד הבע״ח שיש בו נפש חיונית יקרא נבלה, ויש בה טומאת מגע ומשא, אולם כשיופסד האדם השומר תורה ומצות שיש בו נפש אלקית, נבלתו פחותה ומאוסה יותר מפגרי בע״ח, ויש בו טומאת אוהל וטומאת שבעה

Life is kedusha.  When life leaves any living being, the remains can be tamei.  When the spirit of Hashem leaves a human being, his body causes the greatest tumah.  When a woman ends the time she might conceive a child, she becomes a Niddah.  When a woman gives birth, and the extra neshama of the child leaves her, and she is t'mei'ah.  A Metzora is tamei, because he has lost his connection to Klal Yisrael.

So, why  it that a bris milah can only take place after experiencing the kedusha of Shabbos?  On the contrary!  True, the experience of Shabbos invests us with kedusha, but shouldn't the departure of Shabbos result in Tumah?  We have a neshama ye'seira on Shabbos.   When it leaves us, shouldn't it bring Tumah in its wake? (also discussed in the Shem MiShmuel.)  Life =Kedusha; Life ends, Tuma enters. Shabbos=Kedusha; Shabbos ends...... what should happen?

The answer is that when life departs, it leaves nothing behind.  If anything, the object that has lost its life is worse than if it had never lived.  That is not the case with kedusha.  When kedusha leaves, some effect remains.

3(a)2.  The greater the Tzadik, the greater the residual effect of his Kedusha.  There has been a recurring assertion that the bodies of tzadikim gemurim do not become tamei.  See, for example, Rabbeinu Chaim Kohen brought in Tosfos Kesuvos 103b DH Oso, and the Medrash brought in Tosfos Bava Metzia 114b, middle of the page, though Tosfos disagrees, and the Ramban in Chukas about Missas Neshika;  The issue was exhaustively covered and conclusively laid to rest by Rabbi Marcus Spielman in his Tziyun L'Nefesh Tzvi, Brooklyn, 1976, in which he brings hundreds of mekoros on the topic, and more importantly the sefer has haskamos from Reb Moshe, Reb Yaakov, Rav Rudderman, Rav Hutmer, and Reb Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in which they all unequivocally state that le'halacha, we are not someich at all on the shittas hamatirim.  (See a very nice review of the sources here.)  But the point is that there seems to be some concept that there is less tuma on the bodies of Tzadikim.  Why would this be so?  On the contrary.  According to the Akeida and the Zohar, there should be more!  The answer is that Tzadikim convert their bodies into holy things, and even after their death, their bodies retain kedusha.  The Malbim cited above says something very similar, as does the Shmaitsa in the Hakdama.

3(b).  Each and every Shabbos is an opportunity to incorporate and concretize the spiritual growth of the previous week.  When I was in Yeshiva, my Mashgiach and Rebbi, Reb Dovid Kronglas, knew that I hadn't gone to the Mikva before Rosh Hashanna and he knew why:  I am of Lithuanian derivation, and going to the Mikva was not something men did.  So he came over to me and said, "Elezer, it is kedai to go to the mikva, it is brought in Shulchan Aruch, and every baal teshuva is required to go to the mikva, just as a geir must go to the mikva."  I'm not sure it was he who added that "If tvila can make a goy into a Jew, imagine what it can do for a Jew!"  I, being who I am, immediately decided that the example of a ger is irrelevant, because while going once can have an enormous effect, there is no difference between going once and going a million times.  It's like annealing clay: once it's been in the kiln, it's not going to get any harder if you put it into the kiln another time.  Or it's like hechsher for tuma.  Once it was touched by water, it's muchshar forever.

Of course, I was wrong, and it's certainly a minhag tov to go to the mikva, at least once every year or two.  But I'm not sure about the effect of Shabbos.  We see from the Medrash that experiencing Shabbos is an enormously powerful spiritual event that forever changes whatever it touches.  It makes a person fit to serve Hashem.  It even makes a non-sentient animal fit to be offered as a sacrifice.  But we don't see from the Medrash that the second Shabbos has any effect at all.

But according to what Reb Moshe said at the bris, it changes the whole meaning of the Medrash.  If the idea of Pnei Matronisa applies to the Milu'im, then it must be that Shabbos enables growth in Kedusha not only for a newborn, but even for old wrung out shmattehs.  Each and every Shabbos is an opportunity to incorporate and concretize the spiritual growth you worked for during that week.

4.  You can make a Shalom Zachar on Yomtov instead of Shabbos. The Chasam Sofer (Toras Moshe Parshas Emor DH Mimacharas, the third one with that DH) says that if there's a Yomtov after the baby is born that comes before Shabbos, then the Yomtov does the same thing that Shabbos normally does.  Theoretically, then, (according to the Taz in 265 brought in the beginning of this piece,) you ought to have the Shalom Zachar on the Yomtov and not wait till Shabbos.  But it's best not to mix people up, unless you live in a community of Talmidei Chachamim who would enjoy the azus panim more than worry about the minhag.

5.  It's a good thing Shalom Zachars are not by invitation only.  This last piece, which speaks of the Shalom Zachar, is interesting, but best left in Yiddish, because it might lead to some very lonely Friday nights.

דער חידושי הרי״ם איז אמאל אריינגעקומען אויף שלום זכר.  האט ער זיך ארומגעקוקט און געזאגט מיט גרויס התלהבות: דאס ענין פון שלום זכר איז דאך מקבל צו זיין פני מטרוניתא פארן ברית, באדארף מען זען, אז עם זאל ניט זיין ווער פון די ד׳ כתות וועלכע זיינען ניט מקבל פני שכינה.

~

Tazria, Prenatal Influences

There are two similar but separate things that were said regarding the end of Shmini and the beginning of Tazria.  They are often erroneously commingled or interchanged.  It's not that big a deal, because it's not a matter of halacha, and also because neither can be found in any sefarim that the alleged sources printed.  But this is the version I've heard from responsible ba'alei mesorah, and which is also found in some sefarim, albeit always "mipi hashmu'ah."  More importantly, it's worth thinking about what they really mean, so at the end of the post I've added some points that deserve attention.

Both of these Divrei Torah are resonant with the story of the woman that came to the Rebbe and said, "Rebbe, I had a baby a month ago, and I want to know what I can do to make sure he will grow up to be a great tzadik."  The Rebbe answered, Rebbitzen, you are coming to me ten months late.

There are no guarantees in life, and certainly not when it comes to raising children.  But there are things that do make a difference.


The first discussion is from  Reb Akiva Eiger (as brought in Tallelei Oros and Iturei Torah):

The beginning of Parshas Tazria talks about childbirth.   The end of Parshas Shmini describes which species of animals we may eat (the Tahor) and which we may not eat (the Tamei).  The Torah sums up the parsha of kashrus with the passuk (11:47)

  לְהַבְדִּיל בֵּין הַטָּמֵא וּבֵין הַטָּהֹר וּבֵין הַחַיָּה הַנֶּאֱכֶלֶת וּבֵין הַחַיָּה אֲשֶׁר לֹא תֵאָכֵל

To separate the impure from the pure and between the living beings that may be eaten and the living beings that may not be eaten.

Why, in this passuk, does the order change.  In other words, the first phrase lists the non-kosher first- tamei/tahor, and the second phrase reverses that order- may be eaten/may not be eaten.  

To answer this question, Reb Akiva Eiger directs us to the Gemara in Yoma 82b.  The Mishna says that a pregnant woman that has a tremendous craving for a food may eat on Yom Kippur, because denying the craving might cause mortal harm.  The Gemara says that one Yom Kippur, two pregnant women smelled cooking food and were overwhelmed with a  need to eat immediately. The Sages suggested that somebody whisper in the ear of each woman a soft reminder that it was Yom Kippur. One woman calmed down and was able to complete the fast.  The other continued to insist that she desperately needed to eat the food she had smelled, and she was permitted to eat. The Gemara says that the first woman gave birth to the tzadik Rebbi Yochanan, while the second woman gave birth to the wicked Shabsai Otzar Peiri, a notoriously venal profiteer who harmed the community by manipulating the grain markets.

The Gemara says regarding Rebbi Yochanan the passuk in the beginning of Yirmiahu, 

בְּטֶרֶם אֶצָּרְךָ בַבֶּטֶן יְדַעְתִּיךָ, וּבְטֶרֶם תֵּצֵא מֵרֶחֶם הִקְדַּשְׁתִּיךָ

before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, and before you came out, I made you holy.

Regarding Shabsai the gangster, the Gemara applies the passuk in Tehillim 58,

זֹרוּ רְשָׁעִים מֵרָחֶם;  תָּעוּ מִבֶּטֶן, דֹּבְרֵי כָזָב

The wicked go astray from the womb; they err from birth, speaking lies.

Reb Akiva Eiger says that this Gemara answers his question.  When the passuk says בֵין הַחַיָּה הַנֶּאֱכֶלֶת וּבֵין הַחַיָּה אֲשֶׁר לֹא תֵאָכֵל, the word "chaya," whose literal meaning here is  "living being," has a dual meaning, because the same word also can mean "a pregnant woman."  So "Hachaya hane'echeles" is a remez that a pregnant woman that insists on eating when it really isn't necessary, is like a t'mei'ah, in that what she eats has a negative effect on both her and her child.  A "Chaya asher lo sei'acheil" is a remez to a pregnant woman who calms down and controls herself and avoids eating treif, and thereby avoids damage to herself and to her child.  Thus, the order in the two halves of the passuk does not change.  In both parts, we start with the assur and end with the muttar.

Separately, the Vilner Gaon points out that when the Gemara brings the passuk from Tehillim about "The wicked go astray from the womb,", the Gemara is also referring to the passuk later in that chapter, that says 

 חֲמַת-לָמוֹ, כִּדְמוּת חֲמַת-נָחָשׁ;    כְּמוֹ-פֶתֶן חֵרֵשׁ, יַאְטֵם אָזְנוֹ.

ו  אֲשֶׁר לֹא-יִשְׁמַע, לְקוֹל מְלַחֲשִׁים

Their poison is like the poison of a serpent; they are like a deaf adder that stops its ear;

Which will not listen to the voice of charmers....

because the second woman, and her fetus, were not calmed by the whispered voices, just as some snakes are so dangerous that they cannot be controlled by charmers.  The words Lachash, whisper, and Melachashim, charmers, are the same.

The other story, which is all about the Vilner Gaon, is this:  He was asked, when he was six years old, what the connection is between Parshas Shmini and Parshas Tazria.  He pulled out the Gemara we mentioned above, in Yoma, and showed that what a woman gives birth to is very much influenced by what she eats during pregnancy.  So it is very understandable why the Torah follows the laws of Kashrus with the laws of Childbirth.  The last passuk in Shmini is לְהַבְדִּיל בֵּין הַטָּמֵא וּבֵין הַטָּהֹר, and the Torah is pointing out that eating those two kinds of food can influence what kind of child a woman will have.  Not only does the food a child eat affect him, as the Gaon says in YD 81:7, even the food he eats before he's born affects him.  (The main interest of the story is that the Gaon said it when he was six.  The idea itself was said long before then.  The Pardes Yosef in the beginning of the parsha brings it from Igeres HaRamban.)

Now the similarity and the difference between what Reb Akiva Eiger said and the story about the Gaon said should be clear.

I want to point out several things on this topic.

1. The Gemara is full of examples of early childhood influences on spiritual development.  There is the famous Yerushalmi that Reb Yehoshua's mother used to bring his crib into the Beis Medrash so he should soak up the cadence and kedusha of the words of Torah.  We know that Shimshon's parents were warned to avoid wine until their child was born, because of his nazirite holiness.  And recent studies seem to reiterate this idea:  Here is a paragraph from a paper I came across.

A recent study in Korea examined music’s influence on spatial learning ability in developing rats to show that Mozart Effect is strongest during neurogenesis, specifically in the hippocampus where spatial reasoning is most active.  Their procedure was similar to that of CNLM’s spatial task study, however, their focus was on prenatal music exposure, rather than exposure after birth.  Impregnated female rats were randomly divided into three groups; Noise-applied Group, Music-applied Group, and a control group, Undisturbed Group which was left in silence.
Twenty-one days after the rats gave birth, the pups were subjected to a spatial learning ability test which involved the pups finding water in a radial arm maze.  The music-applied pups had the highest number of correct choices in the radial arm maze.
The results of this study suggest that prenatal exposure to classical music in pups does help facilitate brain development in the hippocampus.  They also support the idea that, when applied during neurogenesis, the Mozart Effect is longer lasting, and may even be permanent. However, results with human participants are subject to variability (Department of Physiology Kyung Hee University 2006).

2.  The Gemara in Yoma might be read to mean that Reb Yochanan was a tzadik before he was born, and Shabsai the mobster was a rasha before he was born.  This is not true.  This would contradict every elementary concept of schar ve'onesh, and would provide an excuse for any kind  of bad behavior.  Sorry.  It doesn't.  What we do see from the Gemara is either A or B.

A. That Hashem knows the future, and knows that Rebbi Yochanan was going to be a tzadik.  Since Reb Yochanan was going to be a tzadik, Hashem protected him from food that was assur, like Hashta be'hemtam (Gittin and Chulin 7a). 

In light of the comments that came in, I need to expand a little on this point.  Please note that the passuk in Yirmiahu goes like this:
 בְּטֶרֶם אֶצָּרְךָ בַבֶּטֶן יְדַעְתִּיךָ, וּבְטֶרֶם תֵּצֵא מֵרֶחֶם הִקְדַּשְׁתִּיךָ
There are two halves in the passuk.   
I knew you before I formed you.  
Before you came out of the womb I sanctified you.
I believe that these two halves involve totally different concepts.  The first half means "I, Hashem, knew that you would be a holy man and a navi.  This knowledge is like any knowledge of nevu'ah, the simple fact that Hashem knows what the future holds.  The second half of the passuk means "Knowing that you  were going to be a tzadik and dedicated to My service, I protected you from unholy experiences."

Again, in the original post, I wrote that "This is the pshat we see in the Radak in the passuk in the beginning of Yirmiahu:  the Radak says that Hashem prepared Yirmiahu for his task from the moment he was conceived.  This preparation included whatever influences were necessary for a person particularly adapted for tzidkus and nevuah.  The Radak adds that 

. אביו ואמו נזהרו בקדושה וטהרה בעת ההריון שיהיה הנביא מקודש והחכם גדול"  

But now I see that what I am suggesting is different than the Radak.  The Radak is saying that his parents did all they could to ensure that he could be a tzadik.  What I'm saying, and what I believe the Gemara in Yoma is saying, is that since Hashem knew that Reb Yochanan and Yirmiahu would be tzadikim, Hashem protected them from things that were tamei.

B.  That people are born with tendencies, both physical and spiritual.  What we make of those tendencies is the difference between an Eisav and a David Hamelech.  Both were warriors, both were redheads, but one was Eisav and one was David Hamelech.

3.  Here's an interesting coincidence.  We just saw in the Gemara in Yoma, above, about Reb Yochanan, how his mother was calmed down by the whispered reminder of the kedusha of Yom Kippur.  There is a Gemara in Taanis 21 that echoes this story line.

Reb Yochanan and Ilfa were chavrusos, and both were great talmidei chachamim.  The time came when both had to admit that that they were starving, and they couldn't continue to learn unless they went to seek their fortune.  As they walked, Reb Yochanan heard a voice saying that one of these two would become Rosh Yeshiva.  Reb Yochanan asked Ilfa, "Did you hear that?"  Ilfa said "Hear what?"  So Reb Yochanan decided that the voice must have been meant for him.  He turned back, and was, indeed, made Rosh Yeshiva.  Ilfa, though he remained a great man, went into business and was very successful.  But of course, Ilfa is mentioned in the Gemara only twenty or thirty times, while Reb Yochanan is the pivot of Shas, Bavli and Yerushalmi.

Did you notice, though, that Reb Yochanan and a contemporary, once again, were about to leave a state of purity, and they both heard a whispered voice, and Reb Yochanan listened, and the other did not, and Reb Yochanan turned back while the other went on?  Exactly the same story line, with different words.  אותה הגברת, בשינוי אדרת

~

Tazria, Vayikra 13:3. A Kohen Must See the Tzara'as.

The Torah says that if a nega appears, only a kohen may pasken whether it is Tzara'as. If he is not a Talmid Chacham, he has to take a lamden with him to tell him what to pasken. But the Kohen has to examine the nega'im, and, ultimately, he has to pasken.

Rabbi Dr. Gary Schreiber pointed out that the avoda of the miluim, the process by which the Kohanim were inaugurated, has similarities to the tahara process of the metzora. If you carefully compare the two, you will find that they have avodos in common which are rarely found elsewhere. He said an excellent, and, I think, new, pshat that explains both connections of Kehuna to Tzara'as.

A kohen is subject to the temptation of gaavah, because of his entitlements (the twenty four Matnos Kehuna) and his kedusha (which enables him to do the avodah and requires him to be tahor). Also, Kohanim are aware of everyone’s sins, because whoever brings a korban chatas has to be misvadeh; furthermore, when someone brings a chatas, he has to clearly explain to the Beis Din of the Kohanim why he is bringing it, so they can be sure that the Korban Chatas is indeed required and that it is not chulin ba'azara. So he might say lashon hora. This is a dangerous position to be in: you are born with superior kedusha, Klal Yisrael has to sweat to wrest a living from the earth while you sit at home and get your food-- grain, fruit and meat-- delivered tied with a bow, and you are privy to all their embarrasing failures and sins. It would not be surprising if Kohanim viewed the rest of Klal Yisrael as if they were a bunch of donkeys. This natural tendency to ga'avah and lashon hara can bring Tzara'as.

So the Torah says that the kohanim must personally look at nega’im. They need to see what the result of gaavah and lashon hara are. This constant visual reinforcement will help them control their yetzer hora. Very few oncologists smoke, and many dermatologists obssesively avoid exposure to sunlight, because day after day they see the deadly results of irresponsible and self destructive behavior; so, too, Kohanim are obligated to closely examine the nega'im of Tzara'as, and this will remind them to eschew the traits that bring Tzara'as - Ga'avah and Lashon Hara.

And this explains why the Avodas HaMilu'im recalls Taharas Metzora. The foundation ritual of Kehuna mirrors the taharas metzora process, so that every kohen will read this parsha and remember that the superior status he was granted brought with it a concomitant danger, and that every day he must be on guard against the temptations of ga'avah and lashon hara. Indeed, this concept is found in the Bracha the Kohanim give Klal Yisrael: Yevarechacha Hashem Veyishmerecha: every blessing brings along a heightened risk and the need for shemira. Kohanim, too, are blessed with many things, and these blessings create the need for greater shemira.

(Dr. Schreiber's words:
"...the similarity between the avoda of the taharas hametzora and the miluim of the kohanim which requires blood placed on the the bohanos of each of them. The kohen will hopefully carry the initial impression with him through his years of avodah and refrain from the failings that lead to one becoming a metzora.")

Update 2017: R Avrohom Bukspan sent a comment that connects a Medrash on this inyan. Vayikra Rabba 15.

רבי בשם רבי חמא בר חנינא: 

צער גדול היה לו למשה בדבר, כך הוא כבודו של אהרן אחי להיות רואה את הנגעים?! 

אמר ליה הקב"ה: לא נהנה (אותו) מהם כ"ד מתנות? 

מתלא אמר: דאכיל בהדי קורא ילקה בהדי קילא, (= האוכל מן הקור לוקה מן הקורה).

There are too many pshatim on the words דאכיל בהדי קורא so we won't go into that, but, as I responded to Reb Avrohom, 

Very interesting pshat in the Medrash. Pashtus, it means that if a person shares his blessings with you, you can't turn your back on him when he's suffering and say it has nothing to do with you, you have to share his pain as well. But the way you're connecting it to this pshat, it's Chazal's way of describing what Gaavah is all about- that when it comes to taking, you think you're entitled, so that when the man needs sympathy, you don't feel any obligation to him. "I took because I deserve, and it's an honor for him to give me. I owe nothing to him!" So the Torah says, no. It was a gift, and you should be makir tov to the extent that his pain is your pain.

Update 2021:

Just to outline the similarities between Taharas Metzora and Chinuch Kohanim and Leviim. Chinuch Leviim is in Behaaloscha, and Kohanim is in Tzav.

1. Taglachas: 

Metzora, (ויקרא יד, ט) 

וְהָיָה בַיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי יְגַלַּח אֶת כׇּל שְׂעָרוֹ אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ וְאֶת זְקָנוֹ וְאֵת גַּבֹּת עֵינָיו וְאֶת־כׇּל־שְׂעָרוֹ יְגַלֵּחַ 

Leviim וְהֶעֱבִירוּ תַעַר עַל כָּל בְּשָׂרָם" (במדבר ח, ז)

2. Kibus:

Metzora וְכִבֶּס אֶת בְּגָדָיו" (ויקרא יד, ט) 

Leviim וְכִבְּסוּ בִגְדֵיהֶם וְהִטֶּהָרוּ" (במדבר שם)

3. Tevilla.

4. Tenufa, by Metzora on his living Korban, by the Leviim on them personally.

5. Dam and Shemen on the persons:

Metzora  וְלָקַח הַכֹּהֵן מִדַּם הָאָשָׁם וְנָתַן הַכֹּהֵן עַל תְּנוּךְ אֹזֶן... וכו" (ויקרא יד, יד, י'ז)

וּמִיֶּ֨תֶר הַשֶּׁ֜מֶן אֲשֶׁ֣ר עַל־כַּפּ֗וֹ יִתֵּ֤ן הַכֹּהֵן֙ עַל־תְּנ֞וּךְ אֹ֤זֶן הַמִּטַּהֵר֙ הַיְמָנִ֔ית וְעַל־בֹּ֤הֶן יָדוֹ֙ הַיְמָנִ֔ית וְעַל־בֹּ֥הֶן רַגְל֖וֹ הַיְמָנִ֑ית עַ֖ל דַּ֥ם הָאָשָֽׁם׃

Kohanim, (ויקרא ח, כד-ל)וישחט ויקח משה מדמו ויתן על־תנוך אזן־אהרן הימנית ועל־בהן ידו הימנית ועל־בהן רגלו הימנית

ויקרב את־בני אהרן ויתן משה מן־הדם על־תנוך אזנם הימנית ועל־בהן ידם הימנית ועל־בהן רגלם הימנית

Shemen, by the Kohanim, ויקח משה משמן המשחה ומן־הדם אשר על־המזבח ויז על־אהרן על־בגדיו ועל־בניו ועל־בגדי בניו אתו ויקדש את־אהרן את־בגדיו ואת־בניו ואת־בגדי בניו אתו 

UPDATE 2022.

I just saw an email from R Zweig's yeshiva in Miami. He says that the lesson of davka these three limbs is that a kohen, elevated to Keser Kehuna, holier than every other Jew, needs to be reminded that his is a position of service, not self-aggrandizement. So you put the dam on his hand, leg and ear - The kohen is charged with the work of doing for others, and going to others, and listening to others.  The same lesson is taught the Metzora, who needs to change from self centered to sympathetic.

His words:

In this week’s parsha, we find Hashem giving Moshe instructions for the official installation of Aharon and his sons as kohanim – the priestly class of Bnei Yisroel. Moshe then gathers all of Bnei Yisroel to watch as he follows a step-by-step process for initiating Aharon and his sons as the kohanim.

Aside from the steps that might be expected in the process of elevating their status – immersion in a mikveh, dressing them in priestly vestments, applying and sprinkling the special anointing oil to all the vessels in the Mishkan and to Aharon and his sons as well, etc. – we find a very unusual ritual.

Several sacrifices were offered: a bull was brought as a sin offering, a ram was brought as a burnt offering, and a second ram was brought as a peace offering (see 8:22 and Rashi ad loc). Moshe then applied the blood of the peace offering to Aharon’s and his sons’ right ear lobes, right thumbs, and right big toes.

This ritual is only performed in one other place in the Torah: by the purification of a person who has been struck by tzora’as – commonly (and incorrectly) translated as leprosy.

hat is the meaning of this enigmatic ritual and what is the relationship between initiating the kohanim and cleansing one who has recovered from tzora’as?

Aharon and his sons were being elevated to a new status over the rest of the Jewish people. They were now receiving forevermore one of the three crowns that Hashem gifted to this world; they were receiving the crown of kehuna. Without proper perspective, being crowned can be a dangerous affair as it can easily lead one to harbor false notions of self-importance. A person can actually begin to believe that he is receiving this honor because there is something intrinsically great about himself.

The unique ritual of placing the blood on the ear lobe, thumb, and big toe is intended to address this issue. The unifying connection between all of these parts of the body is that the ears, fingers, and toes represent the person’s extremities. When a person gets cold, the first parts that are affected are the extremities – namely the ears, fingers, and toes – because they are the furthest from the core of the body. Yet, when a person is asked to point to himself, he always points to his core. Thus, by emphasizing the extremities, this ritual demonstrates that the position is not about them personally, it’s about what they can do for others.

The message they receive is that while being anointed a kohen is an honor, it is more significantly a great and awesome responsibility. The Talmud has a dispute about whether the kohanim are agents of the people to Hashem or agents of Hashem to the people, but everyone agrees that they are merely agents. In other words, they are facilitators not principals. This is the message conveyed by placing the blood on the extremities.

This is also true of a person who has been struck by tzora’as. This punishment comes as a consequence of speaking loshon hora. The core motivating force of one who speaks loshon hora is the desire to elevate oneself by putting others down. While every sin contains an element of self-centered behavior, loshon hora is the sin of focusing on the perceived importance of oneself and trying to elevate the opinions of others regarding one’s own self-importance. This is why a person needs a kohen to declare them unclean and the process of purification is the same as the kohen’s initiation. The message they are supposed to receive and internalize is that they need to focus less on themselves and their own importance.

ADDITIONAL UPDATE 2022

Dr. R' Hertzka Grinblatt offered another very good explanation for the commonality among Metzora and Kohen and Levi. He said that all three need to be kovei'a themselves in a machaneh.

The Metzora needs to be allowed into Machane Yisrael; the Levi into Machane Levi'ah; the Kohen into Machane Shechina.

This is a case of תן לחכם ויחכם עוד, and also an application of די לחכימה ברמיזה. Because you can cavil that the Metzora was already muttar to enter the machane after the Shtei Tziporim; and the Levi? He doesn't need any hetter to go into the Har HaBayis. But the point is still excellent. There are three machanos. Each of the three is the place of the parts of Klal Yisrael. For all three of these people, it is part of the process that is KOVEI'A them into their machane position. Again, I can explain it for you, I can not understand it for you.  

Tazria, Vayikra 13:13. A Kohen Must Declare the Tzaraas. Damon Runyon and the Lutzker Rov.

Why does the Torah keep repeating that the Kohen has to see the negah? This passuk alone says it twice.

The Lutzker Rov (Aznayim Latorah) answers this question. The rule (Sifri here) is that a Kohen am ha’aretz or Shoteh cannot pasken on these complex halachos by himself. Instead, he must examine the nega with a Yisroel talmid chochom, the talmid chacham will then tell the Kohen what the halacha is, and then the Kohen makes his pronouncement. If so, we would think, the Kohen is really irrelevant, and there is no point in having him examine the negah. So the Torah has to stress, over and over, that the Kohen must examine the negah.

The idea that a counter-intuitive truth must be stressed and reviewed is evident in another context as well. A member of my shiur conveyed a question his son asked: why is it that we only say Krias Shma, which is de’oraysa and an essential declaration of faith, twice a day, but we say Ashrei, which is just another part of tefillah, a derabanan, and which appears to be no more significant than any other chapter of tehillim, three times a day. (Of course, we say Shma in Le’olam and al hamittah, for a total of four times, but those are add-ons and not essential. (The double requirement for Shma and the triple for Ashrei are requirements explicitly stated.) I answered that Shma is kabalas ohl malchus shomayim, and this is something one can understand and accept upon himself. But in Ashrei we say "posei’ach es yodecho", which means that we accept that it is Hashem that decides who will have enough to eat. But we work all day to earn our food, and that seems to show that we really do not believe that Hashem will provide. Despite this inconsistency, we do know that our bitachon is true, and that Hashem wants both faith and hishtadlus. But we have to repeat Ashrei three times a day to remind ourselves that it is not kochi ve’otzem yadi that brings us hatzlocho.

This answers another question. Reb Moshe Feinstein was careful to not interrupt davening with anything that would interfere with kavana. For example, he would gather his tzitzis before Ahava Rabbah, not at "mei’arba kanfos ho’oretz," because it would distract him from kavanas tefilla. So why were Chazal misakein that exactly when you say the most important possuk in Ashrei, "Posei’ach es yodecho," you should touch your tefillin so that you are not meisi’ach da’as from them. This is even worse than gathering tzitzis, because the whole point is to cause you to think about the tefillin, which interferes with thinking about Ashrei! The answer is that we have to train ourselves to not be distracted by the effort we put in to making a living, we should not come to think that we are the architects of our own success. We have to remember to be memashmeish our tefillin and remind ourselves that it is only through siyata dishmaya that we are matzliach even while we work at that success. Our tefillin show us that our arms and our minds, our physical and mental efforts, only yield the result that Hashem wishes. It is the presence of Hashem, represented by the shel yad and shel rosh, that enable our yad and rosh to be matzliach. The same way a person must train himself not to be misguided into thinking that he is the architect of his success, a person has to be able to be memashmeish his tefillin without being distracted from the kavono of posei’ach es yodecho. It is not a distraction, it is a reinforcement of the idea of posei’ach es yodecho.

(There are two ideas here: One: just as a person must train himself to not be distracted by his work into thinking kochi ve’otzem yodi, so, too, must he train himself to not be distracted from posei’ach while being memashmeish the tefillin, and Two: mishmush tefillin is not a distraction, it is a reinforcement of the idea of posei’ach es yodecho, that it is Hashem that enables our work to be design. The whole point is that we cannot let outselves be distracted from our bitochon by our hishtadlus.)

Ashrei addresses the apparent conflict between hishtadlus and bitochon, and tells us that the two can co-exist. The Gemora there says that Ashrei is choshuv because it has both the Aleph Beis and Posei’ach. The Aleph Beis represents the laws of nature, predictability, A is followed by B, B plus C equals D, a world of natural law and cause and effect, a world in which one plans and strategizes on the basis of experience and reason. Posei’ach represents our faith that it is Hashem’s hashgacha pratis that ultimately determines our success and our parnassah. These two concepts would seem to be mutually exclusive. But Ashrei reminds us that there is no stirah, and that even though we do hishtadlus, we believe that Hashem determines our hatzlocho.

This was nicely encapsulated by Damon Runyon. He said, "The race is not always to the swift nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet." (More Than Somewhat," in reference to Ecclesiastes 9:11.)

Tazria, Vayikra 13:5 and 13:55. Tzara’as, Gore Vidal, the Gerrer Rebbe and the Ben Ish Chai.

This parsha discusses the symptoms of Tzara’as, a disease that Chazal say is of purely spiritual origin. The Gemara in Eirachin 16a tells us that there are seven aveiros which can cause tza'aras. (Loshon horo, shfichas domim, shvu’as shov, gilui aroyos, gasus ru’ach, gezel, and tzoras ayin.) The common denominator of these character flaws is expressed in the word “Tzara’as.” They all represent Tzarus Ha’ayin– a narrowing of the eye. We are all familiar with this syndrome; a tzar ayin is a person who begrudges the success and happiness of others, who sees only flaws in the people he deals with. This is a person who denies the truth of the bracha we make in the morning, “she’asa li kol tzarki.” He feels that he unfairly is missing what is due him, and he resents the success of others.

The state of Tzara’as, and its healing, can be declared only by a Kohen. The Kli Chemda explains that the trait of Tzar Ayin/Tzara’as expresses itself in three characteristics: Lashon Horoh, gassus Ru’ach, and chemdas mamon, or, Envy, Pride and Greed. Aharon Hakohen represented the opposite of those three bad middos; he was a rodef shalom, an anav, and as far as chemdas momon, since Kohanim didn’t get a share of the Land of Israel, they lacked the capitol base to build a financial empire. They lived Mishulchan Gavo’ah, so they had the middah of histapkus, serene contentment.

The only way to cure Tzara’as is to uproot the selfishness that caused it; to slay the green-eyed monster.

An excellent example of this problem was once expressed by that famous man of letters of our time, Gore Vidal. Mr. Vidal is famously talented and sophisticated, and also a queer and an anti-semite. He once said, “It is not enough to succeed; others must fail.” To make this even clearer, he once said “Whenever a friend succeeds, a little something in me dies.“ Gore Vidal personifies this spiritual disease; He is the Poster Boy for Tzara’as.

(Rabbi David Zupnik Zatzal once told me that he and Rav Wolbe once went to visit R Chatzkel before R Chatzkel became mashgiach in Mir, and he told them pshat in Kin’as sofrim tarbeh chochmo. Koshereh kinoh is when you want to know more than the other so that you will be greater than he is. Traifeh kinoh is when you want the other to know less than you, so that you will be greater than he is.)

The truth is, it’s easy to sit here and think that it’s good to be a tov ayin, it’s bad to be a tzar ayin, “I would never be that small minded and jealous to begrudge someone his success.” But it’s not that easy. As R’ Mottel Pagremansky said, to sympathize with someone’s tzoros, you have to be a mentsch. To enjoy someone else’s simcha and success, you have to be a malach. It is a natural trait to be jealous, especially when you are not as successful as you think you should be, and nobody thinks they have everything they ought to have. When a person sees somebody buying a second mansion in Florida while he can barely make his own home expenses, or when the person sees someone else cruising around with a phenomenally expensive pleasure car while he has to drive a "tzara'as-mobile", an old jalopy, it is not easy to avoid kinah. Avoiding tzoras ayin, and learning to be a tov ayin, is hard, hard work.


In the description of the Kohen’s examination of the Tzaru’a, the passuk describes a potential tzaru’ah who is to be declared Tamei and banished. This is a person whose symptoms remain as they were, with no improvement. This state is described in two ways: One pasuk says “ v’hinei hanega omad b’einov,” and the other says “v’hinei lo hofach hanega es eino.”

The Chidushei HaRim

and the Ben Ish Chai

both say a very similar vort, but there is an interesting difference between them. They both say that the word "nega" is an anagram for the word "oneg." The only difference is where the ayin is. The "nun" and the "gimel" are in the same place. Where the ayin is makes all the difference between being a metzora and being a tahor. That is the difference between having an eye with the nega of jealousy, and having an eye with the ability to enjoy someone else’s happiness. When the pasuk says, “Hanega omad b’einov” it means to tell us about both the cause and the effect. If the nega hasn’t changed its appearance, if “Hanega omad b’einov,” this is because the metzora, or the owner of the object that has tzara’as, hasn’t changed. “Lo hofach hanega es eino,” His ayin didn’t change, lo hofach es eino.

The Chiddushei Hari'm ends there. According to the Ri'm, then, Tzara’as is the physical manifestation of a spiritual disease, and curing the middos naturally cures the Tzara’as.

The Ben Ish Chai goes on to add an interesting twist. He brings the stories of Nachum ish Gamzu and Reb Akiva, who each faced seemingly disastrous events. He explains that their unpleasant experiences were a nega, they were a gzeirah ra’ah from Hashem. But because they had such bitachon, they trusted in the love and hashgacha of Hashem, the gzeirah ra’ah was rearranged, so it became a gzeiroh tovah. They were m’hapeich the nega to oneg through their bitachon.

He uses the passuk “hechochom einav b’rosho” to express the idea that their chachma, in other words their emunah in Hashem, brought the ayin from the end of the nega to the beginning of the word– einov b’rosho, which is oneg, not einov b’sofo, which was nega. The gzeirah was bad, but their ability to be m’hapeich the osios made it into a good gzeirah, the zechus of their bitachon made it into a good gzeirah.

(I found the Ben Ish Chai very surprising. We usually think of bitachon, of "gam zu le'tova," of "kol de'avid Rachmana le'tav avid," as showing a person's - this person, for example- Panglossian assumption that everything that happens is meant for the good. According to the Ben Ish Chai, apparently, this is not true. It is the bitachon itself that changes the character of the event; if not for the bitachon, it would have been a disaster. Tzaros are misragshos u'ba'os le'olam. So the expressions 'le'tav avid,' or 'zu letova,' don't mean "the events are good per se". They mean "this may be a terrible event, but I trust that Hashem can and will turn it around and make it good."

This is the theme of Rav Yosef Ber Soloveitchik in his Kol Dodi Dofeik, translated into English as "Destiny and Fate." (p. 6)"Man's task in the world, according to Judaism, is to translate fate into destiny; a passive existence into an active existence; and existence of compulsion, perplexity and muteness into an existence replete with a powerful will, with resourcefulness, daring and imagination.")

The difference between the Ri’m and the Ben Ish Chai is that the Ri’m learns that Tzara’as is generated by bad middos, and cured by eliminating its cause, by becoming a tov ayin. This is specific to Tzara'as. The Ben Ish Chai, on the other hand, learns that yes, in the case of Tzara’as, it does stem from and end with the middah of tzarus ayin/tovas ayin; but the basic idea is of universal application. Many other nega'im can be resolved with this change of attitude. Sometimes, rachmana litzlan, we are menaced with frightening things. If a person is a tzar ayin, the nega will just continue unabated on its horrible course. But being a tov ayin can cure the nega: You can be turn any nega into oneg by showing faith in Hashgacha Pratis and trust in Hashem's love.

Now, here’s the fascinating thing. I realized that this is exactly the point Ravah is making in Brachos 60a. He brings the passuk “Mishe'mu'a ra'ah lo yir'ah, nachon libo batu'ach ba'hashem”, and he says that the passuk can be darshened forward or backward. This doesn't seem to be very interesting, until you realize that he means that the passuk is teaching both the derech of the Chiddushei Hari'm and the Ben Ish Chai.