We saw in our last post how universally dreadful the flow of blood at childbirth and menstruation was to humanity. In these two chapters, the same can be said of skin diseases of all types. In pagan cultures such afflictions were usually thought to be inflicted by demons. In Israel, as hard as it may seem to our modern sensitivities, skin diseases were thought to be an affliction brought about by YHWH as a direct punishment for sin. We see this in the Hebrew phrase “struck with skin disease” (lenega‵ ṣāra‵at, Leviticus 13:2), where “God is always the author of nega‵” (Milgrom, p. 776), the “striking.” This does not come out in translations where it is simply rendered “leprous disease” (RSV) or the like.
When you come into the land of Canaan, which I give you for a possession, and I put a leprous disease in the house …
Leviticus 14:33
On one hand, this uncomfortable thought makes sense; nothing comes to us by chance, but by God, who sovereignly disposes both good things and bad things for the formation of our souls. On the other hand, it makes way for bad theology as we see in Job’s friends, who naturally concluded Job’s horrendous skin affliction must have been punishment for sin, when we know this was not true. We also know Jesus corrected the disciples, who naturally thought the blind man was such because of his sins, or his parents’ sins (John 9:1). Still, the ancient Hebrews lived with this belief that skin diseases, and for that matter, all diseases, were a divine punishment for sin. Indeed, disease and death come to the human race through sin, and so sin is behind it all.
But what was this skin disease? The Hebrew word ṣāra‵at is best translated “scaly,” describing skin conditions which defy modern attempts of medical identification. It was certainly not leprosy as we have come to know it, because this disease, the Greek of which is elephantiasis, did not exist in ancient Israel, but was probably introduced into Palestine through Alexander’s soldiers who contracted it in India at a much later date. The Greek word lepra, which is used in the Septuagint for ṣāra‵at, was mistakenly was applied to the condition we now call elephantiasis.
The descriptions of scaly disease also defy exact modern medical identifications (Leviticus 13). Milgrom classifies them as shiny marks (vv. 2-8), discolorations (vv. 9-17), boils (vv. 18-23, burns (vv. 24-28), scalls (vv. 29-37), tetters (vv. 38-39), and baldness (vv. 40-44). A person thus afflicted must go to the priest to determine its severity. If deemed impure, there is a seven-day quarantine (13:4 Hebrew hisggîr, meaning “enclosed,” “hidden”). This quarantine must be outside the camp, dwelling alone (v13:46), but we see elsewhere in Scripture the afflicted dwelling communally (II Kings 7:3-10, Luke 17:11-19). They are not to dress or act presentable, but with torn clothes and hair disheveled, were to cry out ṭāmē′! ṭāmē′! (Unclean! Unclean!) with hand covering upper lip, when others happened to pass their way.
If and when the disease goes away, the afflicted person must notify the priest who will inspect that person. After seven days, if there is no healing, the priest was to extend the period for another seven days. Obviously, if the disease becomes chronic, then the banishment becomes permanent. It is of great interest that fabrics with mold infestations are treated in a similar way with water cleansing rites, and, if deemed unclean after the second set of seven days, destroyed by fire (Leviticus 13:47-58). Moreover, a similar ritual is applied to moldy houses, which, if it persists, the houses are torn completely down (Leviticus 14:33-53).
As moderns concerned with hygienic protocol and infectious diseases, we naturally think these laws have to do with containing the spread of disease. Actually, these laws have nothing to do with these concerns. In fact, they have nothing to do with healing; healing was not a priestly charism in ancient Israel, but prophetic. There is nothing medicinal about these laws.
Nothing could be clearer: we are dealing with ritual, not medicine. Moreover, the text stresses that it is not the disease per se but the appearance that is the source of its impurity. Indeed, it is the focus of appearance that has resulted in condemning clothes infected by mold and houses by fungus, surely not because they are stricken with ṣāra‵at but because they bear the appearance of ṣāra‵at.
Milgrom, p. 817
Israel, along with her neighbors, had at this time knowledge of all sorts of diseases and remedies, yet we find very little about these in Scripture. Indeed, it is debatable whether ṣāra‵at was even considered a disease in a technical sense, but rather blemishes of body, clothes, and homes, rendering them unfit in sacred space. More specifically, the condition of ṣāra‵at gives the appearance of death. As we shall see later, when Miriam is afflicted with ṣāra‵at. Moses is horrified and says, “let her not be like a corpse” (Numbers 12:12). Death is the very opposite of holiness and life, and cannot approach God, or live amongst the people of God when YHWH dwells in their midst.
These laws concern only the identification of ṣāra‵at, and the purification ritual after it goes away. The cleansing ritual, which is most elaborate, symbolizes life after death. Two birds are required, along with cedar wood, scarlet yarn, and hyssop branches. Both birds symbolize the Israelite before and after. The sacrificed bird represents the old, polluted former self, sacrificed vicariously, killed in an earthen vessel under running water. The live bird, after being dipped in the blood of the sacrificed bird, is let go and symbolizes the Israelite released from death. The healed person is sprinkled seven times with the blood by means of the hyssop branches. After seven days, still quarantined, he must shave all the hair off his head, including eyebrows, and cleanse his body and clothes.
He is now clean, but there is more. On the eighth day he must provide a cereal offering and two lambs, one for a guilt offering, and the other for a purification offering. Blood of the purification offering is placed on the right ear, thumb, and toe, oil is sprinkled upon the man seven times, and then poured over his head, actions reminiscent of Aaron’s ordination. Four of the five offerings are employed here, emphasizing the importance of being re-integrated into the community.
To us moderns, all this seems very cruel. First, God is seen as the afflicter, and second, the afflicted are banished and ostracized. As for the former, we see, in contrast to pagan culture, disease does not come from malignant demons, but from a condition of human sin, and a punishment from a sovereign God. As for the latter, those afflicted are outward symbols of death and decay, and must not come in contact with the holy. God is the healer in Israel (YHWH rōpe′ekā, Exodus 15:26), and when He heals, the person undergoes a ritual involving things of the color red (blood, cedar wood, scarlet, hyssop), symbolic of life opposed to the whiteness of ṣāra‵at and death. In ancient Israel, the welfare of the nation superseded the plight of the individual.
When we get to the Gospels, there is no doubt that leprosy is an outward visible sign of an inward, hidden disease of sin. Leprosy demonstrates how ugly sin is. This world of sin is a leper colony though we may not see it. By healing ostracized lepers, Jesus shows how He heals us from sin, something even more ugly than outward disease. He does this by His sacrifice for sin, cleansing us in His rich, red, blood of life.
Takeaway: Skin disease ṣāra‵at in ancient Israel demanded quarantine not for medical reason, but because its appearance resembled death, and death must not come into contact with the holy.
Questions:
- How do you respond to the idea that it is God who strikes humans with disease?
- This ritual for purification is the most elaborate we have seen so far in the Pentateuch. Why do you think this is so?
Resources Used:
Milgrom, J. Leviticus 1-18
Wenham, G. The Book of Leviticus