Parshat Tazria

This year, we have the privilege of reading the haftarah earmarked only for parshat Tazria—a somewhat rare occurrence, as this parsha is generally read together with parshat Metzora when the haftarah of that parsha is read. In fact, given that this parsha is usually paired with the special maftir readings that precede Pesach (or with Shabbat Rosh Chodesh or “Machar Chodesh”), the last time we read this haftarah was actually 10 years ago!

The selection—found in sefer Melachim Bet (4:42-5:19)—tells the story of the tzaraat (leprosy) that infected Naaman, the commander of the armies of Aram, who was the northern nemesis of Israel. The story, therefore, creates a clear connection to our parasha that deals, primarily, with that very subject. However—as Rabbi Yehuda Shavit points out—there is a basic difference between these two sources. The haftarah story focuses upon Naaman’s need to be cured from his sickness; the Aramean general simply hopes to rid himself of the debilitating ailment. As a result, as one of those who regard the illness as a normal manifestation of the natural world, he searches to find a cure for the solution in nature. But after time, when he realizes that he cannot be cured with any of the usual medications, he, reluctantly, looks for the solution in the “supernatural.” And this explains why Naaman listens to the advice of his simple Israelite captive who advises him to go to the prophet in Shomron who, she declares, would certainly cure him. The Aramean general even convinces his king of Aram—a nation that had hegemony over Israel and that generally regarded the Israelites with disdain—to send him to Israel to demand of the king that he heal Naaman (“Vaasafto mitzorato”).

In contrast to the episode we read in our haftarah, our parasha gives no medical advice as to how to heal a person from the tzaraat. Instead, it tells those afflicted with tzaraat what they must do after the contagion—how they are to rend their garments, let their hair grow and conceal their eyes and nose (verse 13: 45). It does not teach us how to treat the illness. Rather, the Torah demands this public display—even requiring the tzarua (the infected one) to publicly call out “tameh, tameh,”—for it sees the affliction as being a result of a spiritual failure. As such, the “cure” could be brought about by having the afflicted one recognize his shortcoming through public admission, which would lead to his repentance. And, ultimately, that is the Torah’s “cure,” i.e., purification … through contrition and atonement. So, while Naaman concentrated on a medication for the disease, the Torah focuses on a purification—which would lead to protection from the disease.

It is for this reason that the Torah’s aggrieved victim turns to the Kohen for relief, as he is the one who serves in the Mikdash and sacrifices the sin offerings. Naaman, on the other hand, one who considered his ailment a normal manifestation of the natural world … and yet, could find no cure in that world, turns to the prophet—whom he considers to be “supernatural”… —and, perhaps, that is precisely what he is.

Essentially, however, the cure for our illnesses is, indeed, in the hands of He Who controls nature, but relief from some sicknesses can be found—in some way—within our own hands.

If we would have Kohanim serving, once more, in our Mikdash.

Rabbi Neil Winkler is the rabbi emeritus of the Young Israel of Fort Lee, and now lives in Israel.