Showing posts with label Priests. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Priests. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Tazria-Metzora 5770: Two Jewish Views of Illness and Healing

physician_office_system_program.jpgTazria – Metzora, Lev. 12:1 – 15:33


This week's reading combines two Torah portions,
Tazria and Metzora. Tazria begins with a discussion of defilement and purification following childbirth, and continues with a discussion of the dread skin disease of the Bible, tzara'at, a subject continued in Parashat Metzora. Tzara'at denotes a variety of skin rashes and blemishes; but the Torah applies the term to clothing and houses as well, where it may have meant various molds or mildews that could discolor surfaces of fabric or stone. Whereas tzara'at is customarily translated as "leprosy," we will refer to it in the original Hebrew, so as to distinguish tzara'at from Hansen's Disease, popularly called "leprosy" today.


Our selection comes from the first
segment (aliyah) of Parashat Tazria:

"When a person has on the skin of the body a swelling, a rash, or a discoloration, and it develops into a scaly affection on the skin of the body, it shall be reported to Aaron the priest or to one of his sons, the priests." (Lev. 13:2)


Ancient Israelite society did not designate a professional class of "medical doctors." However, both Priests and Prophets functioned as healers and medical diagnosticians. Let us consider the healing work of the Priests first. In the verse we are considering, Aaron and his sons are invested with the authority to evaluate skin ailments and to classify them either as
tzara'at (in which case the patient was deemed ritually unclean) or, for lack of a better term, "not tzara'at" (in which case the patient was deemed clean). It would appear that diagnosing the sick and ministering to them was all in a day's work for the Israelite Priest.

The Priest had no special medicines, potions, or incantations to treat the
metzora (the person afflicted with tzara'at). His work consisted of diagnosing the patient, placing him in quarantine if found with tzara'at, and welcoming him or her back to the community once pronounced clean.

Prophets in the Hebrew Bible also attended to the holy work of healing. In the Haftarah that accompanies
Parashat Tazria (II Kings 4:42 - 5:19), the prophet Elisha treats a man inflicted with tzara'at. Naaman, a foreign military commander, seeks Elisha's help, hoping he will cure him with a divine miracle. Instead, the prophet prescribes bathing carefully and regularly in the Jordan river for a week.

Naaman finds the Prophet's prescription profoundly disappointing. He had expected more from a "man of God." "I thought," he said, "he would surely come out to me, and would stand and invoke the Eternal his God by name, and would wave his hand toward the spot, and cure the affected part." Then, Naaman "stalked off in a rage." Naaman's servants urged him to heed Elisha's simple prescription, and he reluctantly complied.

At the end of a week of bathing, his skin disease had faded to nothing. The solution required nothing more than careful attention to personal hygiene. Like the Priest in the Torah, the Prophet in the Haftarah offers no medicines, potions, or incantations--in this case, just sound advice.

These examples of the Prophet and the Priest elucidate Jewish views of healing. Two lessons emerge.

From the case of Naaman and the Prophet, we see Judaism's overarching practicality and reverence for the natural sciences. Faith in God does not imply that we expect the unreasonable. The Talmud says: "One should not rely on miracles" (
Yerushalmi, Yoma 1:4). Even more to our point, we read, "When a person has pain, s/he should visit a physician" (Bavli, Bava Kamma 46b), thus distinguishing Judaism from religious traditions that would instruct the ailing faithful to avoid modern medicine and instead pray for divine intervention. Judaism sees no conflict between piety and practicality.

From the case of the
metzora and the Priest, we see how Judaism distinguishes "healing" from "a cure." Undoubtedly the Priest brought a form of healing to the patient even if unable to supply a cure. His presence--a presence of compassion and continuing concern--provides a worthy example for us. The Priest had no power to cure the metzora. He could only examine the skin, make his diagnosis, and protect the rest of the community against contagion if necessary. But the Torah's procedure for the treatment of tzara'at required him to make contact with the patient, whose physical suffering was certainly compounded by fear and loneliness.

We give thanks for the advances of medical science that have so dramatically improved our health and longevity. We give thanks for the physicians whose work brings healing to the sick daily, and to the scientists who labor to develop new treatments and discover new cures. We give thanks for a religious tradition that places preservation of our own health and hygiene among the highest of
mitzvot. And, when we or our loved ones are sick, we give thanks for the simple presence of caring friends, family, and clergy, who bring a modest but meaningful form of healing to spirits broken by illness, anxiety, and isolation.


QUESTIONS FOR YOUR REFLECTION AND COMMENTS:


1. A study published a few years ago in The American Heart Journal contemplated the relationship between prayer and healing; much discussion has ensued. Among its findings, the study announced that prayers offered for hospitalized cardiac patients not only did not help their medical progress, but may have hampered it (possibly because of a kind of "performance anxiety," i.e., patients feeling under pressure to recover for the sake of the strangers offering prayers!). What do you think defines an accurate and appropriate relationship between prayer and healing?

2. Recitation of public prayers for healing, long a feature of traditional Jewish worship, have caught on with dramatic success in hundreds of Reform congregations over the past several years. The most popular example is the song "
Mi Shebeirach" by Debbie Friedman, which has become a mainstay in most Reform congregations and which will be "canonized" in the Movement's forthcoming prayer book, Mishkan Tefillah. What do you think accounts for the trend? Why do so many service-goers feel drawn to the public offering of prayers for healing, often accompanied by offering the names of the ailing? Do you find these prayers beneficial or meaningful in any way?

3. "Rabbi Aha bar Hanina said: 'One who visits a sick person takes away one-sixtieth of his illness.' " (Babylonian Talmud,
Nedarim 39b). How do you understand this statement?Do you find it "true," at least in a poetic or metaphorical sense? (It may help you to know that "one-sixtieth" is a Talmudic idiom implying, "the smallest measurable portion.") How does this statement underscore the mitzvah of bikkur cholim, the Jewish obligation to visit the sick?


4. Can you identify a time that you either visited loved ones in the hospital, or when you were sick and were visited by loved ones? Did they, or you, experience any kind of "healing?" If so, what words would they, or you, use to describe how that "healing" felt?


Stay healthy and study heartily!

Rabbi Jonathan Blake


Note: Most of the above comments have been previously published as part of the URJ's "Ten Minutes of Torah" column.


Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Reflections on Parashat Tzav 5770

This week's Torah portion, called Tzav (from the same root as "mitzvah," meaning, "command") speaks of sacrifices and offerings. It contains one of the most inspirational verses in all of Torah—but only if we read the text not on the surface, but deeply. “A perpetual fire shall be kept on the altar, not to go out,” the Torah says (Lev. 6:13).


Our Rabbis found this precept puzzling: why bother keeping the fire going night and day, day and night, even at times when no one was offering a sacrifice? Was this not a waste of firewood, a possible fire hazard, an multiplication of ash pollution—not to mention a burden on the priests who had to monitor the flame minute by minute?



From this puzzle they deduced an enlightening answer. What is the altar on which the fire must be kept burning perpetually? The altar is the human heart, and the fire is the passion of the soul. Even in the darkest hours, our people have kept burning a flame of hope and a passion for life.


Perhaps that explains the following story. A Hasidic teacher was once asked the one thing he would save if his house were on fire. He answered, “The fire!” because only the fire was irreplaceable. This teacher illuminated a truth: the fire of our passion that ignites an impulse to sacrifice on behalf of others is indispensable to what Judaism calls a meaningful life.


So now I ask for your comments: What is the "fire" that animates and gives purpose to your life? How does your Judaism kindle the spark of meaning and dedication within your day-to-day and week-to-week routine?


I am eager for you to share.


L'Shalom and Happy Studying!

Rabbi Jonathan Blake


PS: If you look to the left-hand margin of this blog page, you'll find a new "Ask the Rabbi" box. You can use this module to submit questions anonymously that I will receive and answer (choosing which questions to answer at my discretion). I look forward to hearing what's on your mind.

-JEB

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

"Biblical Fashion Statements": Reflections on Parashat Tetzaveh

Dear Friends,

Please follow this link to a personal favorite sermon that I composed in contemplation of Parashat Tetzaveh, which is read this week.

This image will prove very helpful in your visualization of the priestly garments under consideration.

Stay warm and dry, and keep studying!
Rabbi Blake

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Bereshit 5770: Binary Beginnings

A few comments on the Priestly view of the world, as seen in Genesis Chapter 1.
Special focus on the relationship between the Work Week and Shabbat.




Wednesday, May 6, 2009

Jews, Tattoos, and You! A Few Thoughts on Parashat Emor

Let's consider Leviticus 21:5 from this week's portion, Emor:

"They [the male members of the priestly family] shall not shave smooth any part of their heads, or cut the side-growth of their beards, or make gashes in their flesh" (JPS Translation). This verse about priestly differentiation has been understood as part of a constellation of Biblical teachings about the impermissibility of ritual scarification and tattooing within Jewish tradition (cf. especially Lev. 19:28, "...You shall not gash yourselves for the sake of the dead, or incise any marks on your body.") How can we Reform Jews make sense of these teachings today?

As you view this little video, I would also recommend this provocative article from the New York Times of July 17, 2008.

L'Shalom,
Rabbi Jonathan Blake

CORRECTION: Please note in the video that I intended to reference Leviticus Chapter 21, verse 5 and not verse 6 as stated. I apologize for the error.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Reflections on Parashiot Tazria-Metzora: Leprosy, Genocide, and the Jewish People

What do dreaded Biblical skin diseases have to do with the Holocaust?
Listen to this week's message.
Yours with shalom,
Rabbi Jonathan Blake