Be careful in the plague of leprosy, that you observe diligently and do according to all that the Levitical priests teach you. As I commanded them, so you shall observe to do.
Not to remove the signs of tzaraat from the skin
The cited verse
The Hebrew (Masoretic Text)
הִשָּׁמֶר בְּנֶגַע־הַצָּרַעַת לִשְׁמֹר מְאֹד וְלַעֲשׂוֹת כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר־יוֹרוּ אֶתְכֶם הַכֹּהֲנִים הַלְוִיִּם
In Maimonides’ words
How Maimonides defines this commandment in his Sefer HaMitzvot — his own words, shown as a primary source.
הזהירנו מלקוץ סימני צרעת או לכוותה עד שישתנו מראיה. והוא אמרו השמר בנגע הצרעת. ולשון ספרי השמר בלא תעשה. ולשון המשנה התולש סימני טומאה והכוה את המחיה עובר בלא תעשה, והוא לוקה כמו שבארנו. (תצא, שם):
He prohibited us from cutting off signs of impurity or burning them until their appearance changes. And that is His saying, "Take heed of the plague of tsaraat" (Deuteronomy 24:8). And the language of the Sifrei (Sifrei Devarim 274:1) is, "'Take heed' - is with a negative commandment." And the language of the Mishnah (Mishnah Negaim 7:4) is, "One who plucks out signs of impurity or burns healthy flesh transgresses a negative commandment." And he is lashed, as we have explained (Commentary on the Mishnah, Negaim). (See Parashat Ki Tetzei; Mishneh Torah, Defilement by Leprosy 1.)
Hebrew: Sefer HaMitzvot, Warsaw 1883 (public domain). English: Sefaria Edition, trans. Rabbi Francis Nataf, 2021 (CC0). Via Sefaria; translator’s footnotes omitted.
Literary form: a flat, unconditional command
Applicability
How the catalog describes where and when this commandment applies. These are independent descriptions, not a verdict on which laws still count.
No applicability flags are recorded for this commandment.
Classical halakhic consequences
The consequences the classical halakhah attaches to this commandment, grouped by who imposes them. Where a category has none recorded, that absence is itself meaningful.
Imposed by a court
- Lashes (malkot)
At the hands of Heaven
No divinely-imposed consequence is recorded.
Ritual remedy
No ritual remedy is recorded.
How the streams of Judaism treat this commandment
The streams of Judaism read the same commandment differently — an ongoing plurality, not a ranking. Each position below is reported as the catalog records it; none is presented as the correct one.
- Orthodox Binding
- Conservative Not binding
- Reform Not binding
- Reconstructionist Not binding
- Karaite Not binding
24 of 613 commandments have been examined in depth so far — this one is queued.
How later traditions received this commandment
How later traditions read or reworked this commandment, each attributed to its own voice. The catalog’s own classification of each reception is shown as it records it, never adopted as GEBible’s.
Rabbinic aggadah
- Lev. Rabbah 16:1 expanded it homiletically
- Deut. Rabbah 6:8 expanded it homiletically
Josephus
- Ant. 3.261-273 rationalized it
The New Testament
- Mark 1:44 affirmed it Jesus directs the cleansed leper to show himself to the priest and offer what Moses commanded, presupposing the priestly diagnostic prerogative
Where this commandment meets modern human-rights frameworks
One modern normative lens, attributed to it — not GEBible’s assessment. Each row names the framework it measures against and the catalog’s own classification of the relation.
This framework catalogues tensions; it records agreement in only one of its entries. The near-total tension rate is the shape of the instrument, not a finding.
-
general principle
This framework classifies the relation as an incompatible method.
The commandment prescribes flogging (malkot) for the physical act of removing or cauterizing one's own tzaraat symptoms; post-Enlightenment norms treat corporal punishment as an incompatible method.
-
Article 7
This framework classifies the relation as an incompatible method.
Article 7 of the ICCPR prohibits torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment; the imposition of thirty-nine lashes for interfering with a skin-disease diagnosis falls within the class of physical punishments that international human-rights law designates as degrading treatment.
-
general principle
This framework classifies the relation as a direct contradiction.
Modern penal proportionality doctrine holds that punishment must be commensurate with the harm caused; lashing someone for removing diagnostic skin markers before priestly inspection exceeds any proportionate response under contemporary penal theory.
-
general principle
This framework classifies the relation as abrogated in practice.
Rabbinic tradition holds that lashes may only be imposed by a Sanhedrin of twenty-three judges, an institution that has not functioned since the destruction of the Second Temple; the malkot sanction is therefore de jure but not de facto enforceable.