“This shall be the law of the metzora, etc.” The scripture calls him metzora [leper], implying that he is still a metzora, so how can it say on the day of his purification? For if he is a metzora, there is no day of his purification. Furthermore, how can it call it the day of his purification before saying and behold, it is healed, because before the healing there is no day of purification? And what is meant by saying and he shall be brought to the priest, as and he shall be brought implies against his will? Moreover, afterwards it contradicts this and says and the priest shall go outside the camp, implying that he [the leper] shall not be brought to the priest, but rather the priest goes to him. Additionally, what is meant by saying and behold, the plague of tzara’at is healed from the metzora? It begins with two [entities] and concludes with one, and it should have said “from the one afflicted with tzara’at.”

And the explanation of the matter is: As I have explained above in Parshat Tazria, that leprosy comes because of certain sins, and the name of the affliction is tzara’at and the name of the afflicted person is metzora, because the term metzora means “brings out evil” [motzi ra], as they bring all their hidden evil from within to the outside, exposing their wickedness in public. And the name tzara’at is related to the expression tzarah ra’ah [evil distress], meaning an evil that is like a distress, as our Sages said (Chagigah 5), And many evils and distresses shall befall them — distresses that are like distresses to each other, like a hornet and a scorpion. For just as this wound [of both together] has no remedy through natural means, so this leprosy has no remedy through natural means, to inform them that it is the hand of God that has done this. And Naaman’s leprosy proves this, as the wise physicians were unable to find a remedy for him. Therefore, the sinner must necessarily turn their heart away from their evil path, and nega [affliction] refers to the sin that touches [noge’a] the honor of Heaven, as it were, or the honor of people. And the leprosy forces them, against their will and not for their pleasure, to be brought to the priest to seek healing from him and to learn moral instruction. For if they had initially gone willingly to seek Torah from the priest’s lips and to be among the disciples of Aaron, who loved peace and pursued peace, and not to send strife between brothers with the whip of their tongue, then they would not have come to this leprosy. And since they did not do this willingly when they were healthy and strong (Psalms 73:4), now they shall be brought to the priest against their will to seek from them the path of repentance.

And this is what is meant by “This shall be the law of the leper on the day of his purification.” For on the day that he renews a pure heart within himself and accepts upon himself to return in repentance, on that very day he will be brought, against his will, to the priest to learn from him the way of God. And the language he shall be brought does not speak of physical relocation from place to place, but rather speaks of the relocation of his heart from the evil path he was on to the good path. This means that he accepts upon himself to draw near to the priest and to seek Torah from his mouth. And regarding this it says, This shall be the law [of the leper]. And afterwards, once he has accepted upon himself to be pure of thoughts and pure of eyes from seeing evil, then the priest shall go outside the camp, and behold, the plague — that sin which caused the leprosy — has been healed from the leper [meaning,] from outside of him. And it could not say “from the afflicted one,” since his sin and his deeds caused it, so it needed to say from the leper to teach that spiritual healing came to him by virtue of being a leper, because the leprosy compelled him to repentance. And even so, the Holy One, blessed be He, accepts his repentance, even though it was done under compulsion. And the deficiency inherent in such repentance can be found explained later in Parashat Vayelech, God willing, on the verse And many evils and troubles shall befall them, see there.

And he shall take for the one being purified two birds. Above in Parashat Tazria, I wrote that the main cause of leprosy comes from three sins alluded to in the parashah: they are evil speech [lashon hara], arrogance [gasut haruach], and desire for wealth [chemdat hamammon]. Based on this, we can say that the birds atone for these three: for evil speech because they chatter [make petite sounds] etc., (Arakhin 16b); for arrogance which rises upward like flying birds (Isaiah 31:5); and for the desire for wealth, about which it is said (Proverbs 23:4–5), Do not toil to become rich, etc., for it will surely make wings for itself like an eagle and fly to the sky. And since most commentators have extensively discussed the sin of evil speech in this parashah, I will also add a good lesson to explain what my intellectual understanding captures regarding the three proclamations that our Sages of blessed memory speak about concerning the sin of the tongue.

The first announcement is, what is concluded in the Midrash Rabbati (Metzora 16:2): There was a story about one peddler who was going around towns near Tzippori and would announce and say, “Who wants to buy an elixir of life?” A crowd gathered around him. The author of Matnot Kehunah explains that they looked after him, similar to And they looked after Moses (Exodus 33:8). Rabbi Yannai was sitting and teaching in his reception hall. He said to the peddler, “Come up here and sell to me.” The peddler replied, “You don’t need it, nor do people like you.” Rabbi Yannai pressed him, so he went up to him. The peddler took out a wrapped book of Psalms and showed him this verse: Who is the man who desires life… Guard your tongue from evil (Psalms 34:13–14). Rabbi Yannai said, “Even Solomon announces: He who guards his mouth and his tongue, guards his soul from troubles (Proverbs 21:23) — guards his soul from leprosy.” Rabbi Yannai said, “All my days I had been reading this verse but did not know how its simple meaning was understood until this peddler came and informed me.” Therefore, Moses warns Israel: This shall be the law of the metzora [leper] — the one who brings forth evil [playing on the word metzora as motzi ra — one who speaks evil]. End of quote.

The second proclamation we find in tractate Avodah Zarah (19b): Rabbi Alexandri proclaimed, “Who wants life? Who wants life?” Everyone gathered around him and came to him. They said to him, “Give us life!” He said to them, Who is the man who desires life? Guard your tongue from evil (Psalms 34:13-14). Lest a person say, “Since I have guarded my tongue from evil, I will go and indulge in sleep,” the verse teaches, Turn away from evil and do good (Psalms 34:15). And good refers to nothing other than Torah, as it is said, For I give you good doctrine (Proverbs 4:2).

And behold, regarding the announcement of the peddler, one must be precise: Why should we care if it was a peddler or shopkeeper that necessitated informing us that the announcer was a peddler? Also, the language “going around” [mechazar] needs explanation, as this term refers to one who returns [chozer], and it should have said “circulating” [mesovev]. And why should we care that the towns were near Tzippori? Also, there are many differences between the peddler’s announcement and Rabbi Alexandri’s announcement, because the peddler announced “Who wants to buy the elixir of life?” mentioning “to buy,” while Rabbi Alexandri announced “Who wants life?” without mentioning “to buy.” Also, he didn’t mention any elixir. Regarding the peddler, it says “the crowd looked behind him,” implying they didn’t seek to purchase anything from him but merely looked behind him, while for Rabbi Alexandri “everyone gathered” and said “Give us life.” And what relevance is there in telling us that Rabbi Yannai was sitting in his reception hall? And what relevance is there in telling us that he showed him a book of Psalms that was bound — why does it matter if it was bound or unbound? And what was Rabbi Yannai’s intention in adding proof from Solomon who said He who guards his mouth and his tongue, etc.? And why did he say that all his days he didn’t know how how the simple meaning of the verse was understood, etc., when even young schoolchildren know how to interpret it? And if according to the Ba’al HaAkeida who explained in this section that he found difficult the switch between third person and second person, since it began in third person Who is the man who desires life and then spoke to them in second person Guard your tongue from evil, certainly the meaning of the verse is that the matter should be in the form of an announcement where the announcer proclaims generally in third person, and when buyers come to purchase, then he speaks to them in second person. Nevertheless, it is difficult to understand how he derived all this from Rabbi Alexandri’s announcement.

And what seems closest to me to resolve all these questions. We find in Tractate Arakhin (15b) that Rabbi Chama bar Chanina said: What is the remedy for one who speaks lashon hara? If he is a Torah scholar, he should engage in Torah study, as it is said A healing tongue is a tree of life (Proverbs 15:4). And tongue refers to lashon hara, as it is said Their tongue is a sharpened arrow (Jeremiah 9:7). And tree of life refers to nothing other than Torah, as it is said It is a tree of life, etc. (Proverbs 3:18). And if he is an ignorant person, he should humble himself, as it is said And perverseness therein is a broken spirit (Proverbs 15:4). Rabbi Abba bar Chanina said: For one who has already spoken [lashon hara], there is no remedy, for David has already cut him off with Divine inspiration, as it is said May the Lord cut off all flattering lips, the tongue that speaks big things (Psalms 12:4). Rather, what is his remedy to prevent him from coming to speak lashon hara? If he is a Torah scholar, he should engage in Torah study, etc.

It appears that Rabbi Abba’s reasoning is that logic dictates there should be no remedy for the slanderer, because once someone has already spread slander, blemished the holy, spread evil rumors, and this sound of affliction has spread throughout the world, it is obvious that there is no remedy for the one who was slandered. And even if the slanderer were to sacrifice all the rams of Nevayot, he cannot take back his evil thoughts and words. Can he go from one end of the heavens to the other proclaiming, “I spoke falsely”? This is like the custom in our generation, where if one of the slanderous people defames some honorable person, his words quickly run from the rising of the sun to its setting, and he himself cannot fix what he has distorted. Therefore, it is logical that just as there is no remedy for the one who was slandered, so too there is no remedy for the slanderer. That is why David, through divine inspiration, decreed and said, May the Lord cut off all flattering lips (Psalms 12:4), and he gave a reason for this: Because of the plundering of the poor and the groaning of the needy (Psalms 12:6). These are the ones who are stricken and cry out the groaning of the wounded — the poor and the needy against whom the wrath went forth from the arrow shot of their tongues. Since there is no remedy for them, there is also no remedy for the flattering lips. And regarding this it says, Whoever slanders his neighbor in secret, him I will destroy (Psalms 101:5), which is translated as [destroyed] “completely,” meaning he will remain permanently without remedy.

However, Rabbi Chama believed that since the verse speaks of “healing,” there is no healing except where there is illness. Therefore, he wanted to interpret the verse as referring to someone who has already engaged in slander. As a hint to this dispute, we find (in Ketubot 77b) that Rabbi Yochanan would announce, “Beware of the flies of those afflicted with ra’atan,” which is a kind of leprosy. The Talmud concludes that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi would associate with them and engage in Torah study, etc. It is difficult to understand why Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi would rely on a miracle unnecessarily. It seems to me, by way of allusion, that they disagree along the same lines as the dispute between Rabbi Abba and Rabbi Chama. For the flies are a metaphor for slanderers who act like flies, whose habit is to ignore all the clean parts of the body, but when they find some dirty spot or fresh wound, there they settle on the boil. Similarly, slanderers, if they see a person full of wisdom and honor, will never speak of their virtues, but rather look for the faults of people, for there is no righteous person on earth who does good and does not sin (Ecclesiastes 7:20) in some small foolishness.

And about them Solomon said: Dead flies cause the ointment to stink etc. (Ecclesiastes 10:1). This means those with evil tongues who are compared to flies, and with the breath of His lips He kills, for evil speech kills three people (Devarim Rabbah 5:10). Therefore he called them dead flies and said cause to stink, because their entire intention is to make the reputation of good people stink. He sends forth a stinking savor of the ointment of the apothecary — sends forth is an expression of speech, meaning that even about a perfect person whose reputation is as fragrant as perfumed oil, nevertheless, he strives to make his reputation stink. A little folly is weightier than wisdom and honor — because in his eyes, that small folly that he sees in others is more precious and honorable to him than all the wisdom and honor he sees in them, until this small folly outweighs all the wisdom and honor. And he gives a reason for this: A wise man’s heart is at his right hand (Ecclesiastes 10:2), meaning to judge people favorably, as our Sages said (Tanchuma, Shemot 18), “These are those who go to the right to find merit, etc.” But a fool’s heart is at his left — to judge people unfavorably. Therefore, he never speaks of others’ virtues, only their disgrace. The reason for this is that even on the road where the fool walks, his heart is lacking, and he says to all that he is a fool (Ecclesiastes 10:3). This means that “whoever disqualifies others, with his own defect he disqualifies them” (Kiddushin 70b). This fool who suspects the innocent knows within himself that the same deficiency and flaw he attributes to others exists in himself, and his own heart is also lacking in that matter. Therefore, he says to all that they are fools, attributing to others the same foolishness that he knows exists primarily in himself, thinking that since he acts this way, everyone does the same. These are the flies that constantly investigate people’s flaws and deficiencies, as it is said they looked after Moses (Exodus 33:8). Therefore, they were afflicted with leprosy, which is called “ra’atan” [a type of skin disease]. Just as they are possessors of “ra’atan” [from the root “to see”] who look at and observe the defects of people, so they were afflicted with leprosy called “ra’atan.” And they [the Sages] said to beware of them and not to deal with them to return them from their evil ways or to show them the way of repentance, because he thought that a slanderer has no remedy. Therefore, do not deal with them in vain. This was also the opinion of Rabbi Zeira, Rabbi Ami, and Rabbi Asi, who distanced themselves from their territory [of those who spoke evil speech] in all kinds of ways, as it concludes there.

And it could be that the reason for this excessive distancing was, that they should not receive harm from the arrow of the sharp tongue of [those who spoke evil speech], as it is written One who practices deceit shall not dwell within my house (Psalms 101:7), specifically in His actual house he shall not dwell, but he who speaks falsehood shall not be established across My eyes, even from a distance like a bow-shot, their tongue is a sharpened arrow as indicated by the term across, meaning that the tongue causes harm even from a distance. But Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi believed that there is a remedy even if one has already engaged in slander, if he is a Torah scholar he should engage in Torah study, etc. And this is what Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi concludes, “he attached himself to them and engaged in Torah study,” etc., for he believed that through Torah study there is a remedy even for one who has already spoken slander to the point that He has already been afflicted with leprosy.

Indeed, Rabbi Alexandri also believed that for one who has already engaged in slander, there is no remedy. Therefore, he only approached those groups who had not yet slandered, and he would warn them and teach them ways to maintain their spiritual health so they would not come to speak lashon hara [evil speech]. He would announce, “Who wants life? Who wants life?” He did not mention the word “medicine” nor did he use the term “to buy,” because maintaining health does not require medicine — rather, the doctor teaches the patient how to benefit by guarding against harmful things so as not to become ill. Therefore, it is not proper for the teacher to request payment for his words, for just as speech was given to him as a free gift, so too should he teach ways of healing to others for free. However, one who has already fallen ill needs medicines, and for these the doctor claims his fee, because they didn’t come to him for free — he either paid for them or worked to obtain them. Since Rabbi Alexandri approached the good groups who had not yet spoken lashon hara in order to teach them how to maintain their health so they would not succumb to the sin of evil speech, he simply announced, “Who wants life? Who wants life?” He repeated the phrase to indicate that there is a remedy both for those who might speak lashon hara and for those who might be spoken about with lashon hara. Everyone gathered around him and said to him, “Give us life,” for they also desired this thing that they were already practicing, and they sought to know the path that leads to health maintenance. He said to them the verse, Who is the man who desires life… guard your tongue from evil… And since maintaining health doesn’t require any medicine, he concludes: “Lest you say, ‘I will shut my mouth in sleep to guard my tongue by completely refraining from speaking,’ the verse teaches, and do good, and good refers only to Torah…” This means that although one doesn’t need medicines or great repentance, nonetheless one needs to guard their tongue through Torah study if they are wise. But regarding the common person, he later said, The Lord is close to the brokenhearted, as it is written, perverseness in it breaks the spirit (Proverbs 15:4).

However, this merchant believed that there was a remedy even for someone who had already spoken lashon hara, and he knew this from his own experience because he himself had been a peddler who went about gossiping and habitually used his tongue to sow discord between brothers. Afterward, he took it to heart to repent and sought the remedial paths that our Sages mentioned: for Torah scholars through Torah study, and for the common people through a broken spirit. He saw that these remedies helped him, so he became determined to benefit the masses and bring to repentance all those towns where he knew there were people prone to evil speech, before the days of affliction with tzara’at would come upon them and they would need to seek flying birds like the purification process of the metzora with birds that act meekly. This is what is meant by “he would go around the towns near Tzippori” — he was bringing to repentance those towns that were close to the “bird-like” behavior [a play on the name Tzippori which relates to “tzippor, bird”], those who act in petty ways. He would announce, “Who wants to buy the medicine of life?” — for they were like sick people needing medicines as a remedy, requiring purchase, which is why he mentioned “buying medicine.” For this reason, he did not conclude his announcement with “Perhaps you will say, ‘I will go and engage in sleep, etc.’” — for why would you think that someone who is already sick would be healed by doing nothing? But Rabbi Alexandri’s announcement makes sense as stated, for there the innovation was that one needs Torah study, while here the innovation is that Torah study helps even one who has already gossiped. The peddler did not repeat his proclamation to say twice “Who wants to buy the medicine of life?” as Rabbi Alexandri repeated his words, because even he admitted that for the one who was spoken about [the victim of lashon hara], there is no remedy at all, and he only sought a remedy for the one who had already spoken. This differs from Rabbi Alexandri, who sought a remedy for both. The crowd looked behind him because they had already chosen this corrupt path and were accustomed to speaking lashon hara, so they did not want to buy anything from him. On the contrary, they looked behind him and looked at him critically, for they were like people with a skin disease who look for flaws in others’ souls and their deficiencies. This is the way of those who reject rebuke — they look at their rebuker to see if they can find any hint of disqualification in him in order to respond, “Remove the beam from your own eye, etc.” Therefore, they said to him, “Yesterday you were a peddler going about gossiping, and today you want to correct our ways? Improve yourself first.”

Rabbi Yannai was sitting and expounding in his reception hall, like Rabbi Zeira, Rabbi Ami, and Rabbi Ashi who distanced themselves from the territory of slanderers so as not to be in their company. He said to him, “Come up here.” He replied, “You don’t need [it],” etc. For he believed that the verse A healing tongue is a tree of life speaks specifically of one who has already engaged in gossip, but “you and those like you don’t need protection.” Nevertheless, he troubled himself to know the remedy. He showed him a bound book of Psalms, indicating that because this book is bound and placed in a corner, with no one seeking it, requesting it, or reading it properly, therefore “they do not know the way of morality” as mentioned in the verse Who is the man who desires life? Rabbi Yannai said, “Even Solomon proclaimed,” etc. Behold, the Book of Proverbs is not bound and set aside, for it is the way of the world to teach this book to youngsters, as it says, To give the youth knowledge and discretion (Proverbs 1:4), and yet they do not practice what they read in it: He who guards his mouth and tongue, etc. Rather, they certainly know their Master and intentionally rebel against Him. It could be that the teaching supports him because he found it difficult to understand what Solomon added to his father’s words. It makes sense if the verse Who is the man who desires life is speaking about someone who has already gossiped, for whom the remedy is effective. One might think that someone who has not gossiped does not need to guard his tongue, meaning through Torah study, as Rabbi Alexandri concludes: “Perhaps you will say, ‘I will indulge in sleep,’” etc. Therefore, the verse teaches He who guards his mouth and tongue — that even one who has not gossiped needs protection through Torah study. But if one who has already gossiped has no remedy, then you must say that the verse Who is the man who desires life speaks of one who has not yet gossiped. If so, what did Solomon add in the verse He who guards his mouth and tongue beyond what his father said? Rather, it must be as you say, that this verse speaks even of one who has already gossiped.

And on this Rabbi Yannai said: “All my days I did not know how the simple meaning of this verse was understood, etc.” This refers to the verse He who guards his mouth and his tongue, for he had thought that one who has already spoken evil speech has no remedy. And if so, it was difficult for him to understand what Solomon added to his father’s words, until this peddler came and informed him that the verse Who is the man who desires life speaks of one who has already spoken [evil speech], and thus, He who guards his mouth and his tongue speaks of one who has not yet spoken. And if you prefer to say that Rabbi Yannai was referring to the peddler’s verse, it seems to me that he found it difficult that the verse lacks the response of the buyers. For the seller announces, “Who is the man who desires life?” and afterward the buyers should come and say, “Give us life” or “Sell us the elixir of life,” and then he responds, “Guard and keep your tongue from evil.” Why does the verse omit the words of the buyers? Rather, certainly the truth is as the peddler said, that this verse speaks of groups who have already spoken evil speech and find it difficult to abandon the habit, and sometimes they do not seek to buy the remedy. This happened to the peddler, as they did not ask to buy anything from him. Nevertheless, the announcer is obligated to inform them of this moral path even if they do not request it from him. Therefore, the verse omits the words of the buyers to tell you that even if there is a perverse generation that does not seek to buy anything from the healer and does not inquire of him, nevertheless, he should seek after them to show them the path of peace, as it is written Seek peace and pursue it (Psalms 34:15). And our Sages said (Leviticus Rabbah 9:9): “For all commandments, if they come to your hand you are obligated to do them, but peace is not so; rather, you are obligated to seek after it, as it is said Seek peace and pursue it.” And this is through Turn from evil and do good, and good refers only to Torah, etc., for it is therefore said that all her paths are peace (Proverbs 3:17), because it saves from evil speech which causes all matters of strife. And this is what is meant by Who is the man who desires life, who loves days to see good, for those gossipmongers love the days in which they can see the evil they find in others so that they have a place to lodge against them and speak about them. But one who desires life closes his eyes from seeing evil and loves the days in which he will see the good in others, saying, “If only all God’s people were prophets.” And this happens when he guards his tongue from evil through Torah study, which is hinted at in do good, and “there is no good but Torah,” etc. And for the unlearned person [it comes] through a broken spirit, as it is written The Lord is close to the brokenhearted (Psalms 34:19).

I have gone beyond my usual bounds to elaborate a bit on a matter that is not directly related to the simple interpretation of the portion, because I have seen that this generation is extremely breached in the sin of speech, and it is an old-established leprosy. For even in the Egyptian exile they were [in trouble] because they had informers among them (Tanchuma, Exodus 10), and they were redeemed by virtue of four things, one of which was that they did not speak evil of one another, etc. (Yalkut Shimoni, Emor 657). In the Second Temple period, they returned to their wayward behavior, and still today in this current exile, the sin of speech continues to grow until the wrath of God rises to the point where there is no healing. Therefore, I saw fit to speak somewhat [longer, to bring about] awakening about this, saying perhaps the blind ones in the camp of the Hebrews will hear and take to heart to repair this breach. And this I expounded in the holy community of Lublin on Parashat Zachor 5362 (1602) when the leaders of the people and the sages of all the communities gathered together, and to that I have added words here and there.

And cedar wood, crimson yarn, and hyssop. He should have placed cedar wood next to the hyssop since both are from the plant kingdom. Why did He insert the crimson [derived from a worm] yarn between them? And in Parashat Chukat (19:6), it is written cedar wood, hyssop, and crimson yarn. Why did it change here? It appears that this passage deals with the remedy for evil speech [lashon hara], for even if the one who speaks it is as lowly as this worm, nevertheless one strikes at a great person who is compared to a cedar, as concluded in Yalkut (Isaiah 450) on the verse Fear not, O worm Jacob (Isaiah 41:14). Therefore, one’s atonement requires cedar wood, crimson yarn, and hyssop, to atone for what one did — the act of the worm against the cedar. And one’s remedy is that one should humble oneself like the hyssop, and then one will not desire to cast blemish upon the holy ones.

The reason for the two birds is that a person has two types of speech: one forbidden and one that is a commandment. The forbidden speech — namely, evil speech [lashon hara] and the like — is represented by the bird that makes chirping sounds, which is slaughtered over an earthenware vessel with living water. For if one is an unlearned person [am ha’aretz], he should have a broken spirit, as it is said: and perverseness therein is a breaking of the spirit (Proverbs 15:4). For he has the status of an earthenware vessel, which can only be purified through breaking. Corresponding to this, it says to slaughter the bird that makes chirping sounds over an earthenware vessel. And if he is a Torah scholar, he should engage in Torah study, which is compared to living waters; therefore it says over living water. For this reason, the phrase “this is the law of” is mentioned five times regarding the leper, to tell you that one who engages in the five books of the Torah is saved from leprosy that comes due to evil speech. And the living bird represents the chattering of words in Torah and prayer, though one needs to combine this speech with cedar wood, crimson thread, and hyssop, which indicates submission and humility, so that even in words of Torah, one should have a broken and contrite heart. And our Sages said (Sotah 5a): “Regarding a person [with pride], it does not say ‘and healed,’ but regarding flesh it says And when the flesh has in its skin a boil, and it is healed (Leviticus 13:18).” For one who has a heart of flesh that is soft has healing. And thus our Sages said (Sotah 5a): “Flesh [basar, is formed from the first letters of these three words,] shame, decay, worms,” for remembering all these things brings one to a broken heart and humility. Therefore it says: And he shall dip them in the blood of the slaughtered bird to sprinkle upon him from both birds, in order to connect two things at once — repentance for the past and correction for the future.

“And it shall be on the seventh day, he shall shave all his hair.” And afterward it specified his head and his beard and his eyebrows even though our Sages (Sotah 16a) interpreted this as a general statement followed by specifics. Nevertheless, according to our approach, we can say that the reason it specified these three principal parts is because they are proximate to the three principal sins for which the afflictions come. His head to atone for haughtiness that desires to be the head of everything, as it is written Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, etc., the Lord will smite with a scab the crown of the head of the daughters of Zion (Isaiah 3:16-17). And his beard, which are the hairs around the mouth, to atone for the mouth that speaks lashon hara. And his eyebrows, to atone for stinginess [literally narrow-eyedness].

When you come to the land of Canaan which I am giving you as a possession. One must examine why the Torah specifically mentions when you come to the land of Canaan regarding house plagues more than with other types of plagues. Also, the phrase which I am giving you as a possession seems entirely superfluous because this is already known. Additionally, when it says and I will place a plague of leprosy in a house of the land of your possession, it should have simply said “in your houses.” Although according to Rashi’s explanation that the Amorites hid treasures, etc., this is not a difficulty because it specifies your possession to exclude houses that the Israelites would build there, which would not relate to this reason. Nevertheless, the language is somewhat contradictory because in saying which I am giving you as a possession, it attributes the possession to the Holy One, blessed be He, while in saying your possession, it attributes the possession to Israel as if they are the ones taking hold of the inheritance by their own strength. Also, Rashi’s explanation requires further clarification.

The closest to me to say in this matter is that the main reason is because of stinginess, as our Sages said (Arakhin 16) on the verse and he who owns the house shall come — this refers to one who dedicated his house for himself alone and did not allow others to benefit from it. For this reason, God gave him a house full of all good things to test whether he would do good from his house also to others. As it is said, The silver is Mine and the gold is Mine, says the Lord (Haggai 2:8), and whatever a person gives to others, he is not giving from his own but rather from [what] he received from the Divine table. Therefore it is said, When you come to the land of Canaan, which I give to you as a possession, for they did not inherit the land by their sword, nor did their arm save them (Psalms 44:4), but rather the right hand of the Lord is exalted, to give them the inheritance of nations. And there is no place for the stingy to say, My power and the might of my hand have gotten me this wealth. For behold, it is the Lord who gives you power and possession, and therefore it is right that you should give from His possessions to the poor of His people. And if you do not listen to His voice and you become among the stingy who attribute their possessions to themselves, then I will put a plague of tzaraat in a house of the land of your possession. That is to say: In the place where you attribute the possession to yourselves as if you seized it by the power of your hands. Therefore it immediately says, and he who owns the house shall come — one who dedicated his house to himself alone, saying that by his power and the might of his hand he built his house. Or it may say your possession [since] this refers to one who dedicated his house to himself and does not allow others to benefit from it. And he who owns the house shall come is one who dedicated his house to himself in its most literal sense. For both of them speak of this matter, either of one who attributes possession to himself and from this stinginess follows, or both of them speak of stinginess that follows from attributing possession to oneself.

And some say that the reason for afflictions of houses [in Leviticus], is because the Amorites built their houses for the sake of idolatry. Therefore, the Holy One, blessed be He, brings afflictions upon the houses in order to demolish them. And with this, it seems to me to explain the Midrash that says Like an affliction appears to me in the house refers to idolatry (Yalkut Shimoni, Metzora 563), and it interprets this entire section regarding the Temple that was destroyed because of the idolatry that they placed there, etc. Would it enter one’s mind to say that the author of this Midrash intended to remove the entire section from its simple meaning and interpret it [solely] regarding the destruction of the Temple? Rather, certainly his intention was also to give a reason for the afflictions of houses: because the Amorites built them for the sake of idolatry, and therefore it comes to demolition. And from here he learned to say that also the Temple, in which Manasseh placed an idol, came to demolition because of this sin. And all the details that are mentioned here were also found in the destruction of the Temple. As it says here, and he who owns the house shall come — so too, in the destruction of the Temple, “He who owns the house came” — this is the Holy One, blessed be He. And as it says here, and he shall tell the priest — so too, the Holy One, blessed be He, told Jeremiah, one of the priests who was in Anathoth. And as it says here, like an affliction appears to me — so too, the Holy One, blessed be He, would say [this]. And in this way, all of the Midrash and all of the verses are explained according to their simple meaning.

One should not raise a question on this reason, if so, why wouldn’t the plagues come upon the houses immediately upon their entry to the land? Admittedly, according to the reason of hidden treasures, perhaps not every homeowner merits that treasure. The answer to this is that even in the removal of idolatry, merit is bestowed through the righteous. Specifically, if a worthy person, due to his deeds, dwells in a house, it is not proper for him to dwell in a house that has any trace of idolatry. And we can say that this verse is good news for Israel, as it is written The Lord has spent His fury, He has poured out His fierce anger, and has kindled a fire in Zion (Lamentations 4:11). This good news is that He exhausts His wrath on wood and stones and does not touch the bodies. Similarly, this announcement regarding house plagues is what is meant by something like a plague appears to me in the house — using a simile — like the plague that should have come upon me appears instead in my house. Also, for the reason of stinginess [or grudging eye], it says like a plague that should have come upon those with a grudging eye, which is the scattering of their possessions, so it appears to me in the house, for ultimately the priest will scatter his possessions. And regarding the command to take birds for the purification of the house, we have already said it is to indicate that the one who acquires [wealth] causes it to make wings like flying birds. But according to Rashi, who only mentioned the chattering [of birds], it is difficult to understand what this has to do with house plagues. Therefore, we said above that the birds also contain an allusion to the desire for wealth, which causes pride of heart, and for this reason, one needs to also take cedar wood [for purification].