The haftorah for Tazria is interesting beyond the fact that it is rarely read. In most years parashat Tazria is combined with the portion of Mitzora and therefore the Mitzora haftorah is read. In leap years Tazria is often read on Shabbat HaChodesh, when we have a special maftir and so the haftorah for that maftir is read. This year, however, we hear the haftorah for Tazria (2 Melachim 4:42-5:19).
The bulk of Tazria’s haftorah is the story of the prophet Elisha curing the tzara’at afflicting Naaman, who was the king of Aram’s commanding general (2 Melachim 5:1-19). The king of Aram had dispatched a letter to Jehoram, king of Israel, instructing him to cure his general. Jehoram despairs, believing this a ploy to justify a war. Elisha responds by chastising the king for despairing and instructing that Naaman be sent to him so that it might be known “that there is a prophet in Israel.” Naaman is instructed by Elisha to immerse in the Yarden River seven times. The general becomes enraged, asserting that there were better rivers back home. He is, however, reminded that had Elisha commanded something of greater difficulty he surely would have done it, so why not try this less difficult instruction. The general complies and is cured. The connection to the parsha is evident: parashat Tazria discusses tzara’at and the general has tzara’at. Yet, the haftorah begins with three seemingly unrelated verses.
The first three verses of our haftorah (2 Melachim 4:42-44) relate how during a time of famine a person brought 20 loaves of bread and a sack of grain to Elisha. Elisha instructs that it be given to his disciples. Elisha’s servant objects on grounds that it is of insufficient quantity to feed more than the 100 men present. (The Gamara in Ketubot 106a suggests that 2,200 people were present.) Elisha assures the servant there will be sufficient food and indeed there was enough for them to eat and have leftovers. So how are these three additional verses important to the haftorah or in any manner connected to parashat Tazria?
In these three verses we see a failure on the part of the prophet’s servant to perceive Hashem’s ability to perform miracles. Indeed, these verses form the conclusion of the fourth perek of Melachim Bet. That perek is rife with incidents of concealment or lack of perception. These include the miraculous production of oil behind closed doors and the resurrection of a child, also behind closed doors. Even the death of the aforementioned child was concealed from Elisha himself. There is also an incident of food being prepared for Elisha and his disciples into which was added ingredients that those present failed to perceive as poisonous. Elisha then rendered the ingredients benign.
In our haftorah we have the Jewish king failing to perceive that “there is a prophet in Israel.” This is after the king of Aram failed to perceive to whom the request for cure should be sent. The king of Aram dispatched the letter to the Israelite monarch and not the Israelite prophet. Naaman failed at first to perceive the effectiveness of the Yarden immersions. This failure of perception is a further connection to the parsha.
Tzara’at is the manifestation of a spiritual defect. A defect which the individual failed to perceive. Once tzara’at manifests itself, a Kohen must engage in repeated visual inspections to ascertain if the individual is ritually fit or not. Tzara’at is the result of our failure to look inward and detect our own spiritual defects. When we fail to do this, we are required to undergo an exterior visual inspection about which, no doubt, others will learn and reveal to them we were somehow lacking.
However, it seems unlikely that these three verses were added just to forge a stronger connection to the parsha, considering the already substantial link. No, the three verses were also added to convey a message. Even when a situation seems hopeless, we need to make an effort and Hashem will take it from there. The anonymous donor of 20 loaves of bread likely knew that the number of Elisha’s disciples made his gift insufficient to satisfy their needs. Nonetheless, he made the effort and Hashem joined in the effort and made it succeed beyond hope. So also, Naaman despaired that a few dips in the Yarden could cure him, but he made the effort, trusting in Hashem’s prophet, and was healed.
Although the message of the haftorah is obvious, and often appears in Tanach, it is a message that requires frequent emphasis. The haftorah reminds us that even though the ultimate outcome of our endeavors is concealed, what is revealed to us is that without effort, failure is assured. Yet, with effort and trust in Hashem, sometimes we can be a part of bringing about the miraculous.
William S.J. Fraenkel received a Bachelors of Arts in Religion and a law degree from NYU and served as a board member and officer of several Orthodox shuls. The opinions expressed in this dvar Torah are solely his own.
