1. Part of the purification process of the person affected by the Biblical disease "tzara'at" is the need for them to be exiled from the camp for a period of seven (or a multiple thereof) days. This brought public attention, and probably humiliation, to the offender. Is their exile from camp designed to humiliate, or is that merely a consequence of their separation? Under what conditions is it acceptable to humiliate another person? Should there be a difference between ethical crimes and ritual ones? What might be the purpose of humiliation?

  2. The Biblical disease of "tzara'at" can affect not only people, but clothing and homes as well. It is up to the Kohen who is summoned to determine whether or not the affected area is indeed affected with "tzara'at" or not, and the consequences of such a diagnosis can be severe. In the case of a home, designating a house as infected means that everything in the home is considered impure as well, and needs to be destroyed. Surprisingly, in what appears to be a legal loophole, the Bible instructs that the house be emptied prior to summoning the Priest ("Kohen"), to avoid having the diagnosis be declared on all the contents of the home. What implications might this have for judges, educators or social workers who are sometimes impelled to make decisions with potentially catastrophic results for the bystanders in the case? Imagine a single mother convicted as repeat offender of shoplifting. While she may rightfully belong in jail, should the judge take into account the effect of such a sentence on the children?

link to lookstein.org