Tazria/Metzora. These just may be the most dreaded Torah portions among young students studying to become Bat or Bar Mitzvah, not only because of their detailed descriptions of infections, discharges, and various other eruptions that make us uncomfortable, but also because of the procedures that were applied in response to such tza-ra-at.
According to the text, the Priest is tasked with the role of diagnostician. It is up to the Priest to identify and evaluate if and when such infections qualify as tza-ra-at, as ritually impure. It is also, of course, up to the Priest to implement and enforce the required treatment, to evaluate the progress of healing and when appropriate to facilitate the ritual by which a person returns to their status of tehara, a full participating member of the community.
As Nehama Leibowitz points out in her detailed study of the parashah, some view these portions as biblical recommendations for the prevention of the spread of disease in the community, a medical handbook of sorts used to ensure public health. Other commentators focus on the obscure and seemingly supernatural elements in the text highlighting these diseases as a form of direct retribution from God in response to ill behavior. The rationalist in me certainly leads me to prefer the former understanding; I simply cannot accept a theology of divinely gifted affliction. Regardless, what remains clear, however, is that this text resists clear understanding in a modern context – our questions may have to be left unanswered. We may simply have to live with our discomfort in not fully comprehending the biblical procedures. As Meshekh Hokhma, a late 19th century commentary by Rabbi Meir Simha ha-Kohen of Dvinsk, reminds us ‘The preoccupation with these plagues, entrusted to the judgment of Aaron and his sons, is one of the mysteries of Torah…” (see N. Leibowitz, Studies in Vayikra, p. 185)
Lessons in the text abound, however, despite our inability to comprehend the details with certainty. This year, in light of the national debate regarding health care reform, one verse stands out. If, however, one is poor and without sufficient means… (Lev 14:21). After outlining the offerings one is expected to bring to the priest before being deemed fully recovered from affliction, the text provides an alternative for those who cannot afford. Verses 21-32 of chapter 14 detail the manner in which the one with insufficient means can still make appropriate offerings in line with that person’s means. Consideration is made for all; no one in the community is left ostracized by illness due to financial constraint. Everyone is given a path back into the community. The system doesn’t turn away those of lesser means; it accommodates to them. And more importantly, at a time when healing is most in need, the opportunity to return to a state of ritual purity – a state we may not fully understand today but which was clearly a significant status in the biblical period – is not withheld from those with insufficient resources.
Regardless of where we each stand on the current status of health care reform legislation, one thing I hope we can all agree on is that no one who is suffering from affliction, particularly treatable illness, should be left on the outskirts of society simply due to insufficient means. Access to quality health care is a public health issue, and we cannot allow our health insurance companies to serve as our priests, as the sole decisors of who is granted access back into the community and who is left alone without communal support. No question one of the greatest challenges of our current administration, but our health care system must find a way to recognize the humanity and entitlement to good care of each and every individual in our society.
No comments:
Post a Comment