The parsha repetitively refers to the metzora, once the kohein enters him into the process of communal rehabilitation (14:4), as the “m’taher - the one becoming cleansed”. In place of the expected pronoun or referring to him as a metzora the Torah calls him a m’taher eleven times, seven times in the standard process and four times in the scaled back “section eight” metzora tahara process.
Additionally in the middle of the description of the proceedings (14:11) the kohein who leads the reentry is no longer an undescribed kohein but rather he now becomes the “kohein ha’mitaher – kohein cleansing”. Precisely that passuk refers to the two facing each other with intent and purpose, as “the ‘cleansing’ kohein situates the man to be ‘cleansed’ and [the sacrifices that he brings] in front of Hashem at the gateway to the Ohel Moed.”
What makes this so remarkable is that this pattern is not found in the quintessential process of becoming tahor and the prototypical restoration of access to the sanctity. The process of the para aduma (Parshas Chukas chapter 19) which is also a tahara process described in detail in the Torah shebichsav, does not identify the kohein as the “kohein ha’mitaher” nor the one who is tamei as “the one becoming tahor”. Why is this emphasis exclusive to the metzora?
The metzora is sent out of the entire Jewish camp whereas the tamei l’nefesh is banned exclusively from entering the mikdash (see Rashi, Parshas Naso, 5:2). In other words, though tuma and the process to remove it is rooted in the parsha of para aduma, the distancing of the metzora is far more extreme and severe. The tamei l’nefesh is a valuable and contributing member of the community. Indeed, his tuma may be due to his holy work in a hospital or on the chevra kadisha or in many emergency service situations. His reentry is not at all a form of social rehabilitation. More likely, his distance and return stems from the Torah’s agenda to advance an elevated soul and inculcate within him a heightened sensitivity to life, or an agenda to create distance between the mikdash experience and the sadness that is often born of our mortality.
By contrast, the metzora has violated public discourse and used it to discredit, disparage and damage. He has breached the standard of Jewish speech, what is discussed and how it is discussed. He has planted insensitivity where supreme thoughtfulness is demanded. Thus the teaching of this repetition is that the rehabilitation that needs to transpire requires an individual who is pining to come back, to be “cleansed” and a kohein who believes in himself and his calling.
If, sadly, the metzora seeks the convenience and comfort of living amongst familiar and familial surroundings, then he is not a candidate for an effective tahara. Alternatively, if he is ready for a renewed appreciation of a tzelem Elokim and an inspired understanding of the power of prayer, the impact of teaching, and the well-placed good word, then he is no longer a metzora, rather he is a m’taher - one who sees himself every step of the way as one who wants to live the refined life of a Jew.
Additionally, if the kohein sees his interaction with the metzora, who may well be inconsiderate, negative, and quarrelsome as a required but burdensome assignment, then he lacks what Hashem needs of him at this time. However if he has the vision, passion, concern and, ultimately, the connection to be able to elevate, then he will successfully embrace this, “l’kach nivcharta” (Rashi 9:7) moment.
The lessons for the transmission of life-changing Torah instruction is that it happens when the m’taheir and mitaher come together.