Midrasch zu Wajikra 5:1

(Lev. 14:2:) THIS SHALL BE THE LAW OF THE LEPER. Let our master instruct us: How many children of Adam have no share in the world to come?¹Tanh., Lev. 5:1; Numb. R. 14:1; PR 6:4; ARN, A, 36; Midrash on Proverbs, 22. Thus have our masters taught (in Sanh. 10:1–2): THESE ARE THEY WHO HAVE NO SHARE IN THE WORLD TO COME…. THREE KINGS AND FOUR COMMONERS²Gk.: idiotes. HAVE NO SHARE IN THE WORLD TO COME. THE THREE KINGS ARE JEROBOAM, AHAB, AND MANASSEH.³See Sanh. 101b-104a. R. Judah ben Shallum the Levite said: The sages of the Mishnah wanted to teach that there were four kings and reckon Solomon with them; however, a heavenly voice (bat qol) came forth and said (in the words of Ps. 105:15): TOUCH NOT MY ANOINTED. Nevertheless they returned one day to teaching < as before >. Fire from the heavens came and destroyed their benches. < The heavenly voice > returned and said (according to Job 34:33): SHOULD HE REPAY AS YOU WOULD, WHEN YOU HAVE REFUSED? All the same, why did they so teach? Because it is written (in I Kings 11:1, 6): NOW KING SOLOMON LOVED MANY FOREIGN WIVES < …. > AND SOLOMON DID WHAT WAS EVIL IN THE EYES OF THE LORD. (Sanh. 10:2, at the end:) THE FOUR COMMONERS ARE BALAAM, DOEG, AHITHOPHEL AND GEHAZI. You find that these were condemned to Gehinnom on account of the words of their mouths. In the case of Balaam, he was driven into Gehinnom because of his speech, as stated (in Numb. 23:7): FROM ARAM HAS BALAK BROUGHT ME, THE KING OF MOAB < FROM THE HILLS OF THE EAST: COME, CURSE JACOB FOR ME…. >⁴Numb. R. 20:19; also below, Numb. 7:17. < He said: > I was one of the exalted ones;⁵Heb.: MRMYM, which the midrash seems to understand as related to M’RMYM, i.e., “one of the Arameans.” I was one of the division of < the > patriarchs. BALAK BROUGHT ME (yanheni) and cast me into Gehinnom. Now BROUGHT ME (yanheni, rt.: NHH) can only imply Gehinnom, since it is stated (in Ezek. 32:18): SON OF ADAM, BRING (rt.: NHH)⁶The Buber text reads the middle letter in this root as a het in agreement with Numb. 23:7; but the parallels in Tanh., Lev. 5:1; Numb. R. 20:19, and the Masoretic Text all read the middle letter as a he, a reading which together with the preposition ‘al, requires the translation, LAMENT OVER. THE MASSES OF EGYPT AND CAST THEM DOWN… < UNTO THE LOWEST PART OF THE NETHER WORLD ALONG WITH THOSE WHO GO DOWN TO THE PIT >. So also was Doeg banished because of his speech. When? When David fled to Nob, the city of priests {to Ahimelech}, where Ahimelech received him, Saul noticed and gathered all his servants. He said to them: A fine way you are treating me! For David does whatever he wishes, and not one of you has put a word in my ear. It is so stated (in I Sam. 22:8): IS THAT WHY ALL OF YOU HAVE CONSPIRED [AGAINST ME? FOR NO ONE IS PUTTING A WORD IN MY EAR] < WHEN MY SON IS MAKING A DEAL WITH THE SON OF JESSE >…. Doeg began to utter evil speech, as stated (in vs. 9): THEN DOEG THE EDOMITE, WHO WAS STANDING AMONG THE SERVANTS OF SAUL, < ANSWERED AND SAID: I SAW THE SON OF JESSE COME TO NOB…. > It was also by his hand that eighty-five priests who wear the ephod and the high priest Ahimelech were slain. And he smote Nob the city of priests with the edge of the sword. So also was Ahithophel banished because of his speech. Thus it is stated (in II Sam. 17:23): SO WHEN AHITHOPHEL SAW THAT HIS COUNSEL WAS NOT HEEDED…. THEN HE SET HIS HOUSE IN ORDER AND HANGED HIMSELF. Gehazi also was banished on account of his speech. When Naaman became leprous and was healed at the hands of Elisha, Naaman began to give silver, gold and gifts⁷Gk.: dora. to Elisha, but he did not want to accept them. Now Gehazi was ministering to Elisha. He saw the silver, the gold, and the clothes; so he said (in II Kings 5:20, 21, 27): MY LORD HAS SPARED < THAT ARAMEAN > NAAMAN…. < THEN GEHAZI CHASED AFTER NAAMAN…. > THEREFORE THE LEPROSY OF NAAMAN [SHALL CLEAVE TO YOU AND TO YOUR SEED FOREVER]. Why? Because it is stated (in Deut. 13:18): AND LET NOTHING CLEAVE TO YOUR HAND OF THAT WHICH IS DEVOTED. Now Naaman and the king of Aram served idols; and it is written (in Deut. 7:26): DO NOT BRING AN ABOMINATION UNTO YOUR HOUSE…. Since you said (in II Kings 5:20): AND I WILL ACCEPT SOMETHING FROM {HIS HAND} [HIM], by your life, you shall < also > take his deformity. Thus it is stated (in vs. 27): THEREFORE THE LEPROSY OF NAAMAN SHALL CLEAVE TO YOU. R. Pedat said: The Holy One has made a covenant with the world that anyone who utters evil speech receives leprosy. Where is it shown? From what is written on the matter (in Lev. 14:2): THIS SHALL BE THE LAW OF THE LEPER (hametsora'), < i.e. > the one who proclaims evil (hamotsi' ra').⁸Below, 5:5; ySot. 2:1 (17d); ‘Arakh. 15b; Cf. Lev. R. 16:1.

1) (Vayikra 5:1) ("And if a soul sinned and heard the voice of an oath, and he was a witness or saw or knew — if he does not tell, then he shall bear his sin.") If it were written (only) "he heard the voice," and not "of an oath," I might think the intent of the verse to be that if one overheard a man telling his neighbor "Let us go and serve idolatry," and he could have testified in beth-din to this effect and failed to do so, ("I might think") that he is liable. — Now if one who (only) says this ("Let us go and serve, etc.") is not liable, should the one who just overhears it be liable (for withholding testimony)! It must be, then, that the verse is speaking of one being besworn in beth-din not to withhold testimony, and withholding it, in which instance the sayer (i.e., the beswearer himself) is not liable (even if he knows that the oath will be violated) and the hearer is liable (for its violation).

1) R. Yossi Haglili says: What is the intent of "and he was a witness or saw or knew, if he does not tell, then he shall bear his sin"? It applies only to testimony that can consist in seeing without knowing or in knowing without seeing, and this obtains only with a monetary claim. ("seeing without knowing": as when one says to another: "I counted out a maneh to you in the presence of so and so, who witnessed this, but I did not apprise them whether it were a gift or a loan or a pledge," and the other says: "Let them come and testify that you counted it out to me in their presence and I will pay you." ("knowing without seeing": as when one says to another: "You admitted owing me a maneh in the presence of so and so," and the other says: "Let them come and testify to this, and I will pay you." R. Akiva says (on Vayikra 5:5: "and he be guilty for one of these"): There are among these that for which he is liable (for withholding testimony) and that for which he is exempt. How so? If money is claimed, he is liable; if anything else, he is exempt.