English translation — תזריע ב

1.

At the beginning of the portion of the plagues of man it stands¹

: "When a person will have in the skin of his flesh etc."

The verse uses here the description "person",

which is the name <b>of the superiority </b>of Jews

(and the highest description of the four descriptions person man male man mortal man)².

It is known the question³

: How does it come,

that when one holds at the level of "person" there should be by him "in the skin of his flesh a rising etc.",

plagues — that the impurity of leprosy is from the most severe impurities⁴,

and Chazal⁵

say that "a leper is considered as dead"?

explains the Alter Rebbe⁶,

that hi hi hanotenet: specifically because it speaks about one who is on the level of "Adam" — which is a "great level ..

shlimo d'khula" — he is afflicted with tzaraat:

The matter of the negaim "on the skin of his flesh" shows,

that the evil that causes the nega

(and consequently — he must be in its likeness)

is not <b>in </b>

(the <b>innermost </b>of)

the person

explains,

that by the wicked,

who "are entrenched in impurity,"

a sin does not make an impression until it is noticeable "in the skin of his flesh,"

because "a species within its own species does not interpose"],

But it is only what has remained "waste" and evil in his externality — "at the end of his garments,"

and therefore from this becomes a plague "&lt;b&gt;in the skin &lt;/b&gt;of his flesh"

(specifically).

With this the Alter Rebbe also explains&lt;sup&gt;8&lt;/sup&gt;

Why "the commandment of negaim is not practiced in our time after the destruction because they are not common at all etc. but they are miracles"

(as he brings from the Rambam&lt;sup&gt;9&lt;/sup&gt;)

— because it is "not found among us" such ones who should not have any evil in the inwardness,

"that even the righteous and good still have a little evil in the inwardness",

and consequently the evil does not cause any negaim.

B.

One must understand:

Chazal say&lt;sup&gt;10&lt;/sup&gt;

that the matter of negaim comes as a punishment for the sin of lashon hara,

which is a most severe sin,

until it is equivalent to the three transgressions of which "one should be killed and not transgress",

and "it is as if he denies the fundamental principle"

(as the Rambam elaborates in Hilchos Deos&lt;sup&gt;11&lt;/sup&gt;)

— so how can one say,

that he is an adam hashalem,

his description is adam,

that what he lacks is only the clarification of the external evil?

The difficulty in this is even greater: the severity of "one who speaks lashon hara" is brought in the Rambam

(also)

in the &lt;b&gt;same &lt;/b&gt;halacha&lt;sup&gt;12&lt;/sup&gt;

which the Alter Rebbe brings as a proof that negaim are miraculous phenomena which are not common in the present era,

and he elaborates there how from speech of lashon hara one can come

(may it protect us)

even to denial of the fundamental principle — and here the Alter Rebbe says that we are speaking about an adam hashalem?

3.

Will be understood with the introduction of the explanation in the continuation of the words of the Rambam in the above halacha:

After the Rambam explains that negaim come for the sin of lashon hara

(and brings the lesson from Miriam)

— he continues with a matter that seemingly has no connection to lashon hara

(and certainly not to the laws of tumas tzaraas),

And this is his language:

“Kal vachomer

(from Miriam)

to the wicked foolish people who multiply to speak great and wondrous things ..

And this is the way of the sitting of the wicked scoffers: at first they multiply in idle words ..

And from this they come to speak disparagingly of the righteous ..

And from this it will become habitual for them to speak about prophets and to cast fault in their words ..

And from this they come to speak about God and deny the fundamental principle ..

This is the conversation of the wicked that is caused for them by sitting at street corners and sitting in synagogues of the ignorant and sitting in taverns with drinkers of liquor,

but the conversation of the kosher ones of Israel is only in words of Torah and wisdom,

therefore the Holy One, blessed be He, helps by their hand and grants them merit in it etc.”

One must understand:

a)

Here it speaks indeed about the prohibition of speech <b>lashon hara</b>,

which causes the impurity of tzaraat — so how does it fit in

( — and at length)

about the conversation of the wicked in general,

and which begins from "frivolous words"

(not — speech <b>hara</b>),

and ends with heresy against God, may it not be said?

that since lashon hara is a detail within "conversation of the wicked",

therefore,

speaking about lashon hara and its <b>severity</b>,

the Rambam must

(due to the severity of the matter)

explain in this,

in the disparagement of conversation of the wicked in general etc. — it has no place in <b>Laws of Impurity of Tzaraat</b>

(which is the punishment only for lashon hara)

The length seemingly belongs only in Hilchos Deos,

where he speaks the details of the laws how one must be careful from forbidden speech].

b)

If the Rambam wants here to bring out the severity of the prohibition of lashon hara,

should he have brought the severe expressions which he writes about a number of lashon hara in Hilchos Deos¹¹?

Further: in Hilchos Deos&lt;sup&gt;11&lt;/sup&gt;

brings the Rambam the statement of Chazal&lt;sup&gt;13&lt;/sup&gt;

"Whoever speaks lashon hara is as if he denies the fundamental principle,"

that the sin of lashon hara &lt;b&gt;in itself &lt;/b&gt;is severe "as if he denies the fundamental principle";

But here he says,

that &lt;b&gt;from &lt;/b&gt;lashon hara comes &lt;b&gt;later &lt;/b&gt;forth denial of the fundamental principle — "And from this etc. and from this they come to speak about God and deny the fundamental principle"

(But not that lashon hara itself is "as if he denies the fundamental principle").

4.

And one must say the explanation in this:

With the lengthiness about the manner of the conversation of the wicked,

the Rambam comes to explain <b>the </b>definition of "lashon hara",

which gives to understand why the result of lashon hara is "tzaraat":

In lashon hara there are two matters:

a)

The speaking of lashon hara

(which comes from the evil traits of the desert — he has jealousy and hatred,

a.

z.

etc.)

causes damage etc. to the one he speaks about.

d.

h.

The main deficiency in this is that his lashon hara brings

(out his evil traits)

and harms the other.

— and about <b>this</b> matter of lashon hara the Rambam speaks in Hilchos Deos,

as one sees there the content of the entire chapter,

that he speaks all about undesirable speech and conduct from man to his fellow.

b)

lashon hara — from the aspect of the speech <b>itself</b>¹⁴

: someone who speaks lashon hara,

and even not intentionally etc. — the speech itself drags <b>him</b> into evil.

Because even though the power of speech is superficially only an external power

(a garment,

and an external garment of the soul),

it is nevertheless connected with the essence of man¹⁵

; and for this reason,

when one speaks lashon hara,

the undesirable speech drags

(from its own side)

him into even more evil¹⁷.

5.

And this is also what the Rambam brings out through his elaboration,

at the end of the Laws of Tzaraat,

regarding "the conversation of the wicked":

He begins [by saying] how one must beware of the conduct of "the wicked fools who multiply to speak great and wondrous things"

(in which there is not yet any content contrary to the desired),

and then explains "the way of the sitting of the wicked scoffers",

that "at first they multiply in words of &lt;b&gt;nonsense&lt;/b&gt;"

(in which speech there is no &lt;b&gt;evil&lt;/b&gt; quality etc.),

but these very words drag the speaker until the ultimate evil

(as a continuation of the words of the Rambam)

And this is also the definition of lashon hara — "&lt;b&gt;the conversation of the wicked&lt;/b&gt;",

speaking in a manner as the wicked speak.

The emphasis is on that which he is not careful,

blemishes etc. &lt;b&gt;in his speech&lt;/b&gt;.

And as the Rambam emphasizes immediately at the beginning of the matter — when he speaks about how negaim come to warn about lashon hara — that at the time "his skin changes and becomes afflicted" the person remains "isolated and distinguished alone until he does not engage in the conversation of the wicked which is mockery and lashon hara"

— which is seemingly: "conversation of the wicked" and "mockery" — who mentioned them?

Only with this is the Rambam about to explain,

that lashon hara

(which brings to negaim)

is a detail and comes from the side of "conversation of the wicked" in general

(a deficiency in the speech

(external)

of man),

because the matter of negaim is

(as above),

that "the skin of his flesh" — the external aspect of man — is not as it should be.

6.

Based on this will be sweetened what the Rambam elaborates how the matter

(that negaim come because of lashon hara)

is learned from the incident of Miriam — "And concerning this matter the Torah warns ..

&lt;b&gt;Consider &lt;/b&gt;what happened &lt;b&gt;to Miriam &lt;/b&gt;etc.":

The punishment of negaim for lashon hara is

(&lt;b&gt;not &lt;/b&gt;because of the

(first)

matter mentioned above in lashon hara,

that his evil traits harm the other,

but only)

because of the speech itself;

For by Miriam it is indeed &lt;b&gt;on the contrary&lt;/b&gt;: "She raised him on her knees and endangered herself to save him from the sea"; her speech was altogether &lt;b&gt;not&lt;/b&gt; with the intention to disparage him&lt;sup&gt;18&lt;/sup&gt;,

and even more

(says the Rambam)

: "&lt;b&gt;She did not speak&lt;/b&gt; in his disparagement but erred etc."; and also regarding Moshe "&lt;b&gt;He did not&lt;/b&gt; mind all these things etc." —

In her speech there was no evil or damage etc.

(not from Miriam's side and not from Moses' side),

it is a matter entirely external¹⁹,

and nevertheless "she was immediately punished with tzaraat".

7.

Based on the above, one will also understand why the Rambam brings

(at the beginning of the aforementioned halacha)

the order of how negaim come "to warn against lashon hara":

"The walls of his house change"

(Plagues of houses),

<b>Then </b>if "he persists in his wickedness ..

the leather vessels in his house change ..

And if he persists in his wickedness ..

the garments upon him change",

and only then — "if he persists in his wickedness ..

his skin changes and he becomes leprous" —

Because this corresponds to the aforementioned content of lashon hara and its order:

When one begins to speak lashon hara,

the speech is an external matter &lt;b&gt;entirely&lt;/b&gt; which "does not affect &lt;b&gt;him&lt;/b&gt;",

and therefore is stricken

(only)

the house which is completely separated from him&lt;sup&gt;20&lt;/sup&gt;

; but the more he speaks,

the more the speech itself draws him in,

the evil becomes more internalized,

and therefore the plagues come in things which are closer to him — his utensils,

his garments,

until — the skin of his flesh.

(But when the evil enters the innermost interior — then the entire matter of the plagues is absent,

as above section a).

And according to the above it is understood how the explanation of the Alter Rebbe mentioned above — that negaim come specifically upon a perfect person who has rectified all things except for "the end of his garments" — is not only not a contradiction to the words of the Rambam,

but on the contrary,

both explanations are in agreement —

Because the caution regarding lashon hara that is brought out in the Rambam,

is the caution in speech &lt;b&gt;in its own right&lt;/b&gt;,

which is an external matter.

8.

According to all the above, one will also understand why the enactment

(purification)

of negaim is specifically through a kohen.

For at first glance it is not understood: since it is speaking about a complete person,

as above,

who has the power to refine all his inner matters and has done so in actuality — then how is it that he himself cannot refine the external evil that is in him?

is the explanation in this: that which a complete man can become ensnared in lashon hara,

even though he has already clarified all inner matters within him — is because there can be a &lt;b&gt;concealed evil &lt;/b&gt;

(depth of evil)

which is deeply rooted in the man,

and it does not come out from him in the open;

and the concealed evil expresses itself in the speech of the man²¹

that speech is connected with the essence of man],

and in such speech which is ostensibly a merely external matter,

without any actual evil content²²

is a complete person who has already refined his evil that is in the internality,

it is not relevant to speak such speeches],

And therefore the correction for evil speech is by correcting the evil &lt;b&gt;concealed &lt;/b&gt;that is in his soul.

And therefore it is specifically through a kohen,

which is "Chesed Elyon"²³,

and therefore he has the power to purify the hidden evil;

And therefore one must have the <b>speech</b> of the kohen "You are pure"²⁴

— because through his speech he draws down a most supreme light which rectifies the hidden evil,

until the metzora becomes completely pure.

(From the talk of Shabbos Parshas Tazria 5741)