Parshas Tazria
1. It has been explained many times1 that the names of the parshiyos in the Torah are not merely an incidental sign, used to distinguish one parsha from another. Rather, each name — like names in general, "השמות שנקראים בהם בלשון הקודש" ("the names by which [things] are called in the Holy Tongue")2 — indicates and expresses the content of that particular parsha.
This is why we see that several parshiyos are called not by the word with which they begin, but by a later word, because it is specifically that word which indicates the content of the parsha*2.
So too regarding this week's parsha: it is called (nowadays3) not by the name "אשה" ("woman") — even though that is the first word (after the general introduction, "וידבר גו' לאמר" ("And [G‑d] spoke… saying")) with which the parsha begins — but by the name "תזריע" ("conceives").
We must therefore understand: what is special about the word "Tazria"4, by virtue of which it contains within itself the content of the entire parsha?
Even more must be understood: on "אשה כי תזריע" ("When a woman conceives"), Rashi in his commentary on the Torah cites (from Midrash Rabbah5): "אמר ר' שמלאי כשם שיצירתו של אדם אחר כל בהמה חי' ועוף במעשה בראשית כך תורתו נתפרשה אחר תורת בהמה חי' ועוף" ("Rabbi Simlai said: Just as the formation of man came after every beast, wild animal and bird in the act of Creation, so too his law was set out after the law of beast, wild animal and bird"). From this it is understood that the innovation of our parsha relative to the matters discussed in the previous parsha is that there the law of "beast, wild animal and bird" was set out, while in our parsha — the law of man.
Since this is so, it follows that the word "Ishah" is not merely the beginning of the parsha, but also indicates its content — the law of man. Why, then, is the parsha called not by the name "Ishah" but by the name "Tazria"?
We must conclude that the distinctive quality of "the law of man" — which is the content of the parsha — is expressed in the word "Tazria."
2. From the above wording of our Sages, "Just as his formation… so too his law…", it is evident that the fact that "his (man's) law was set out after the law of beast, wild animal and bird" is [not because he was created last — for then it would have said "because his formation…". And since it says "just as his formation…", it is evident that the fact that his law comes at the end is] due to the very same reason that his formation was at the end6.
What, indeed, is the reason that man was created at the end? The Midrash itself states it here7: if man does not conduct himself as he should, "אומרים לו יתוש קדמך שלשול קדמך" ("he is told: the gnat preceded you, the worm preceded you") [or, as the Gemara says8: "שלא יהיו המינים אומרים שותף הי' לו להקב"ה במעשה בראשית" ("so that the heretics should not say that the Holy One, blessed be He, had a partner in the act of Creation"); "כדי שיכנס למצוה מיד" ("so that he might enter into a mitzvah immediately"); "כדי שיכנס לסעודה מיד" ("so that he might enter the banquet immediately")9].
The commentators10 therefore ask: all these reasons seemingly apply only to his formation, but not to his law. Why, then, does the Midrash say "just as (and not "because") his formation… so too his law…"?
The explanation of this is as follows: the Alter Rebbe explains in Tanya that man's lowliness relative to all other created beings, even relative to impure animals and even relative to a gnat, is not only when he actually commits a sin (as in the plain meaning of the wording of the above Midrash), but also because he "יכול להתאוות לדברים האסורים" ("is able to desire forbidden things"). By this alone he is already "more inferior, loathsome and abominable than impure animals, insects and reptiles," because all of them (not only do they not actually sin, but they) "אינם11 יכולים לעבור כלל על רצונו ית'" ("are entirely unable to transgress His will, may He be blessed").
Based on this we will understand the above saying of our Sages, "Just as his formation… so too his law…": the lowliness of man, who is able to desire something that is "against His will" — just as this is the reason that he was created "after every beast, wild animal and bird," so too is it the reason that "his law was set out after the law of beast, wild animal and bird," as will be explained.
3. The order in Torah — that is, the way a Jew begins to learn and studies Torah — is from the easy to the difficult. This applies both to the content of study: "בן חמש למקרא בן עשר למשנה" ("At five years old, for Scripture; at ten, for Mishnah")12, etc. — and within these themselves: "ילמד אדם תורה ואח"כ יהגה" ("A person should first learn Torah and afterward deliberate in it")13 (and examine it… to raise questions…); and to the manner of study: one does not begin immediately with the study of Torah for its own sake in the loftiest manner — like "דוד הי' מחבר תורה שלמעלה בהקב"ה" ("David, who would unite the Torah above with the Holy One, blessed be He")14 — but rather as our Sages ruled15: "מעיקרא כי עביד אינש אדעתא דנפשי' קא עביד" ("At first, when a person does [something], he does it for his own sake").
(In the giving of the Torah the order is the reverse: first a higher level and afterward a lower one. As the order in the verse16: "ואהי' אצלו… שעשועים" ("I was with Him… a delight"), and only afterward "ושעשועי את בני אדם" ("and my delights are with the sons of man") — such is the order of the drawing down of the Torah from above to below17. In man's study and service, however, the order is from below to above, from the easy to the difficult.)
And just as the order in the general study of Torah is from below to above, so too is the order of the study of the parshiyos: first come the easier matters, and only later the more difficult ones. This is why "his (man's) law was set out after the law of beast, wild animal and bird": because the refinement — the "להבדיל בין הטמא ובין הטהור" ("to distinguish between the impure and the pure")18 — of beast, wild animal and bird, since they "are entirely unable to transgress His will," is easier than the refinement of man.
According to the above explanation it is understood that Rabbi Simlai's view regarding the fact that man was formed last is not on account of his superiority — "so that he might enter the banquet immediately" — for then there would be no rationale for the fact that his law was set out after the law of beast, etc.
[On the contrary: if man is higher, his refinement should come more easily, and accordingly "his law" should have been set out before the law of beast, etc.]
Rather, on the contrary, it is on account of his deficiency — that he was created from coarse matter and is inclined toward evil, etc., more than animals19, so that it is harder to "set him in order," as explained above.
4. Based on the above, we will also understand the connection of the saying "Just as his formation… so too his law…" to its author — Rabbi Simlai20:
A quality of a thing can come in two ways: a) it is given from above — either from birth, or it is given as a gift after its formation; but one has not toiled for it. b) Through effort: one toils for it and earns it.
In each of these two ways there is a special advantage. The qualities of the first kind have the advantage that they are not limited; since they come from above, they are subject to no limitations — unlike the qualities that come through effort.
On the other hand, the qualities that come through man's effort have the advantage that they are internalized. Matters that one receives as a gift from above, or that one possesses from birth — since the recipient did not toil for them, it is possible that he is not a vessel for them, and consequently they do not touch him in his inner being. The qualities that he has toiled for, by contrast, do touch him; they are bound up with him and penetrate his inner being21.
And this is the difference between the two reasons given for the creation of man last. When speaking about the qualities that come as a gift from above, man is superior in his quality to the other creatures right from the beginning of his formation — as soon as he is born, even before he has begun to toil: he possesses the G‑dly soul, which is "חלק אלו-ה ממעל ממש" ("truly a part of G‑d above")22. And although later he may, G‑d forbid, rebel against his Maker — a terrible deficiency that no other creature has — he does not thereby lose his innate quality, the quality of his soul, for even at the time of sin it remains "באמנה אתו ית'" ("faithful with Him, may He be blessed")23.
When speaking, however, about the kinds of qualities that come through effort, in relation to them man at the beginning of his formation is not higher than all creatures. On the contrary, what is manifest in him is matter that is prone to sin (for the quality of his soul is still concealed; he must first reveal it through his service). Therefore it is taught that the reason he came into being last is "so that he will be told: the gnat preceded you."
5. And this is the connection of the saying "Just as his formation…" — which teaches that the reason man was formed last is on account of his deficiency — to Rabbi Simlai:
Rabbi Simlai was not of distinguished lineage (to the point that Rabbi Yochanan refrained from studying Sefer Yuchsin with him)24. Therefore his approach was that everything must be earned through toil, and it "made sense" to him that a true quality is one that is earned through toil. That is why he teaches that the reason for "the formation of man after every beast, wild animal and bird" is on account of "the gnat preceded you"25: his quality he will attain only later, when he toils, as will be explained.
Based on this we will also understand why the parsha that speaks of "the law of man" is called by the name "Tazria": because "Tazria" (a feminine form) indicates service26. As stated in Likkutei Torah27, "איש מזריע תחלה" ("the man seeds first") indicates an arousal from above, a gift from above; whereas "אשה כי תזריע" ("when a woman conceives") indicates an arousal from below — the service of man; and the qualities he attains through it are not "given," but earned through toil.
6. There is a deeper point in this. By the principle "סוף מעשה במחשבה תחלה" ("Last in deed, first in thought")28, it is understood that according to all the reasons (including the reason that man's formation last is because "the gnat preceded you"), we must say that the fact that man was created last is due to his superiority29 — that he is the ultimate purpose of the entire Creation.
The difference, however, is this: according to the reason "so that he might enter the banquet immediately" (and the like), man in and of himself — immediately upon his creation — has superiority over all creatures (because the quality of his soul is always present in him, as explained above in Section 4). According to the reason "the gnat preceded you," however, in and of himself he is far lower than all creatures (because his body is of exceedingly coarse matter). And the fact that specifically he (also with respect to the body) "arose first in thought" is due to the elevation he will reach only through his service30.
And the elevation he will reach through his service is bound up with the very fact that by virtue of his body he is lower than all creatures: precisely because the human body is of coarse matter, lower than a gnat — when he brings it about that the adam (man) formed from the adamah (earth) should become an "Adam" in the sense of "אדמה לעליון" ("I will be likened to the Most High")31, he brings a new existence into being32. Through this the power of the Essence is revealed in him, for the power to create something new from nothing belongs only to the power of the Essence33.
7. Based on this it may be said that the name "Tazria" expresses (not only the concept of service, as explained above at the end of Section 5, but) also the superiority of service:
It is known in general34 that giving birth is a creation of something new from nothing. Yet the novelty is not in the birth itself but in the "Tazria" (the conception). Birth is merely a revelation of what was concealed, for even before the birth the fetus already existed in concealment, and through the birth it merely emerged into revelation. The novelty, however, was accomplished with the "Tazria" (only through the birth does one know that the conception was as it should be).
That is why the parsha is called by the name "Tazria," because this word expresses the elevation that is accomplished through service, as explained above.
(From the sichos of Shabbos Parshas Tazria, 5725)
Notes
1) See at length Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 5, p. 57 ff.
2) See Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah, ch. 1.
*2) See Likkutei Sichos, ibid., note 10, and the sources cited there.
3) Unlike in the Siddur of Rav Saadia Gaon — [section on] the Torah reading.
4) Especially since the law that the parsha comes to teach us, "she shall be impure for seven days…," is because of "and she gives birth," while "Tazria" is only a detail and the manner of the birth (see Niddah 27, end of side b (cited in Rashi at the beginning of our parsha); 27a).
5) At the beginning of our parsha — with a variation in wording.
6) As proven in Gur Aryeh here. One may add a further proof from what our Sages said (Bereishis Rabbah 8:1), also Rabbi Simlai*: "Just as his praise [of G‑d] comes only after the beast… so too his creation…" — since the praise comes after the creation, it is impossible that the order of the praise should be the reason (and cause) for the order of creation; and from this the point stated in the text is proven. See also below, note 30.
*) See in the Midrash Rabbah here the wording of Rabbi Yochanan's saying on this — cited below, note 25.
7) And similarly in Sanhedrin 38a.
8) Sanhedrin, ibid.
9) The commentators on Rashi here.
10) Ch. 29 (p. 36, beginning of side b).
11) Ch. 24 (p. 30, beginning of side a).
12) Avos, end of ch. 5. See also the Alter Rebbe's Hilchos Talmud Torah, at the beginning.
13) Avodah Zarah 19a, and Rashi there.
14) Sefer HaBahir — cited in Likkutei Torah, Shelach 51a, and in many places. See also Zohar III, 222b.
15) Pesachim 55 [as printed in the OCR; likely 50], end of side b. Moreover, the beginning of study is in a manner of literally "not for its own sake" — for the sake of "roasted grain, etc." (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, beginning of Perek Chelek, s.v. "and the fifth group"), out of fear of the strap in the teacher's hand (Tanya, Kuntres Acharon, s.v. "To understand what is written in Shaar HaYichudim"). See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 5, p. 14 ff., and note 58.
16) Mishlei 8:30–31. See Kuntres Acharon in Tanya, s.v. "David Zemiros" (161a); Sefer HaMitzvos of the Tzemach Tzedek, the mitzvah of carrying the Ark on the shoulder; the maamar beginning "Alpayim Shanah," 5711; and elsewhere.
17) See Tanya, ch. 4.
18) End of Parshas Shemini.
19) See Kuntres UMaayan, Maamar 15, ch. 2, that this inclination stems from the matter of the body.
20) Based on this, the question of why Rashi in his commentary here also cites the name of the author of the saying is resolved.
21) See Avodah Zarah (19a): "It is called by his name… (of him who) deliberates [in it]," and Rashi there: "because he toiled…". See also Tanya, beginning of ch. 5.
22) Tanya, beginning of ch. 2.
23) Ibid., end of ch. 24.
24) Pesachim 62b, and Rashi there.
25) It may be said that this is also the reason for the exposition of Rabbi Yochanan (Vayikra Rabbah here): "If a man is meritorious, he inherits two worlds, this world and the World to Come, as it is written, 'Behind and before You formed me'" — that even the matter of "behind" You formed me is explained by Rashi in a positive sense — because Rabbi Yochanan was of distinguished lineage*: for they studied Sefer Yuchsin with him, to the point that he was the source for the study of Sefer Yuchsin [which is why, when Rabbi Simlai wished to study Sefer Yuchsin, "he came before Rabbi Yochanan"]; and therefore he explains [the verse in terms of] the superiority of man.
This is also why the Midrash there concludes, "Rabbi Yochanan says: Even his praise came only last" — for the fact that his praise comes last is (simply) due to man's superiority, since the order of praise is from below to above: inanimate, vegetative, animal and speaking (and note Yahel Ohr, p. 581). See below, notes 29 and 30.
*) Based on this, it is all the more understandable why he was so particular regarding his lineage (Kiddushin 71b).
26) It is also understood simply: in order for "Tazria" to be complete, i.e., that it should lead to "and she gives birth," there must be [the principle that] "his mother eats" so that the fetus may eat, etc. (Niddah 30b).
27) Our parsha, the maamar beginning "Sos Tasis."
28) Wording of the piyut Lecha Dodi.
29) Based on this it will be understood why Rabbi Simlai too says (Bereishis Rabbah 8:1), "Just as his praise… so too his creation…" — even though the fact that his praise comes last indicates (as above, note 25) his superiority — because according to Rabbi Simlai as well, the creation of man last is due to his superiority.
Based on this it is all the more understandable why in Bereishis Rabbah there the wording is "so too his creation (beriaso)" — and not "his formation (yetziraso)," as the wording in Vayikra Rabbah there (and like the wording of the verse, "Behind and before You formed me") — because "Yetzirah" (formation) is the level of revelation (form), whereas "Beriah" (creation) is [the level of] thought and concealment. Therefore, when speaking about man's lowliness, which is in him in a revealed way (from the moment he comes into being), it says "You formed me"; and when speaking about his superiority (which, however, is not yet actually in him now, but will come only through his service) — his being the ultimate intent (it "arose in thought") — it uses the wording "his creation."
30) Based on this, the wording "Just as his praise… so too his creation…" will also be understood. For seemingly: although the meaning of "just as" (and not "because") is that for the same reason that man's praise comes after the praise of the beast, etc., for that very reason his creation too is last (as above, Section 2 and note 6), nevertheless, since the praise comes after the creation, why does it make the creation dependent on the praise? —
The answer is that by this it explains that man's superiority is not on account of his natural birth, but on account of his service: although he was created of coarse matter, etc., nevertheless he too praises the Holy One, blessed be He (and then specifically, after his praise, his praise is loftier than the praise of the animals); and specifically through this the intent of his creation is fulfilled.
This also explains the continuation of the words of the Midrash (Bereishis Rabbah) there: first it cites the saying of Rabbi Shmuel, "Even in praise…" [like the wording of Rabbi Yochanan (the source of [the study of] lineage) in Vayikra Rabbah there], for from the fact that it makes his praise dependent on his creation it is evident that in his creation, in and of itself, there is superiority; and on this it afterward cites the saying of Rabbi Simlai, "Just as his praise… so too his creation…," [teaching] that the superiority is on account of his praising — on account of his service, as explained above.
31) Sefer Asarah Maamaros, Maamar Em Kol Chai, ch. 33, and elsewhere. Shelah, Torah Shebiksav section, end of the discourse "Tzon Yosef." And in many places.
32) See at length Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 7, p. 22 ff., and the notes there.
33) Iggeres HaKodesh, sec. 20 (p. 130, beginning of side b). And in Hemshech 5666, pp. 354–355, [it is explained] that the power to refine "the utterly physical nature of the animal soul…, which is in the manner of a complete novelty, like creation of something from nothing," is because in the soul, "even as it descended far below (into the body and the animal soul), there is the power of the Essence."
34) Maamar beginning "Same'ach Tesamach," 5657, p. 3 (Sefer HaMaamarim 5657, p. 175) ff.; the above-mentioned Hemshech, pp. 339, 405. See also Likkutei Torah, Shir HaShirim 9a.
Key Lesson
The Torah of man follows the laws of animals because man, made of coarse matter and able to desire what G‑d forbids, is harder to refine, and his true greatness comes through his own toil rather than as a gift. This is why the parsha is named "Tazria": like conception, which is the real novelty behind birth, a Jew's service creates something genuinely new and reveals the power of G‑d's very Essence within him.