Chapter 5 of Sefer Melachim B is a chapter of a great sanctification of God's name: Naaman, commander of the army of the king of Aram, a great and distinguished man, is stricken with leprosy, and through the counsel of a young captive girl from the Land of Israel he comes to Elisha the prophet. Elisha sends him a messenger and commands him to immerse seven times in the Jordan. Naaman is enraged at the simplicity of the matter, and in the end he listens to the counsel of his servants. From here the story unfolds into two opposite endings: the Aramean gentile comes to recognize the kingship of God, while Gehazi, the prophet's attendant, stumbles in his craving for money and is stricken with leprosy. In this lesson we will proceed through the pesukim in order, from the immersion in the Jordan onward, according to the explanation of the Malbim.
וַיֵּרֶד וַיִּטְבֹּל בַּיַּרְדֵּן שֶׁבַע פְּעָמִים כִּדְבַר אִישׁ הָאֱלֹהִים, וַיָּשָׁב בְּשָׂרוֹ כִּבְשַׂר נַעַר קָטֹן וַיִּטְהָר. - So he went down and immersed himself in the Jordan seven times, according to the word of the man of God, and his flesh returned like the flesh of a young child, and he was clean.
Naaman went down and immersed himself, and his flesh returned to being clear and radiant like the flesh of an infant, and clean of the leprosy. The healing came exactly as the word of the man of God, not through a charm nor through sorcery, but through the simple command of a prophet: a righteous one decrees and the Holy One, blessed be He, fulfills.
וַיָּשָׁב אֶל אִישׁ הָאֱלֹהִים הוּא וְכָל מַחֲנֵהוּ, וַיָּבֹא וַיַּעֲמֹד לְפָנָיו וַיֹּאמֶר: הִנֵּה נָא יָדַעְתִּי כִּי אֵין אֱלֹהִים בְּכָל הָאָרֶץ כִּי אִם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, וְעַתָּה קַח נָא בְרָכָה מֵאֵת עַבְדֶּךָ. - And he returned to the man of God, he and all his camp, and he came and stood before him and said: Behold now, I know that there is no God in all the earth except in Israel, and now, please take a gift from your servant.
Naaman declares: until today no one succeeded in healing me, not a charm, not idolatry, and not any other power. Only here, in Israel, the prophet told me a simple thing and healed me. Now I understand that there is no God in all the earth except in Israel.
But one must ask: what is the connection between this recognition and the request "and now, please take a gift"? The word "and now" means "and therefore," and what is the logic of the matter? The Malbim explains it based on the halacha with which Masechet Avodah Zarah opens: it is forbidden to accept a gift from a gentile on the day of his festival. The Gemara brings two versions of the word: some read "eidam" and some read "eidam" (with an aleph). "Eid" in Arabic means festival (Eid al-Fitr, Eid al-Adha), and as in the phrase in the pasuk "let them bring their witnesses that they may be justified." Whereas "eid" in the holy tongue means calamity, as in "one who rejoices at his eid" - rejoices at his calamity. We call their festival day specifically with a term of calamity. One who says "eid" is not mistaken, and one who says "eid" (with an aleph) is not mistaken.
And the reason for the prohibition: when a gentile gives a gift on the day of his festival, he afterward goes to his idolatry and gives thanks to it that the Jew accepted from him. It turns out that I caused him to worship idolatry. We do not accept gifts from them, and all the more so we do not give to them.
Here the concern was twofold, for the day of his healing is like a festival day for him, and to whom would Naaman go to give thanks? To his idolatry. If so, if Elisha accepts a gift from him, it turns out he causes him to sin through idolatry. Therefore Naaman comes and says: you have nothing to fear, "behold now, I know that there is no God in all the earth except in Israel," and consequently I no longer worship idolatry, "and now" - and therefore, "please take a gift from your servant." The way is open before you to accept a gift from me without concerns.
וַיֹּאמֶר: חַי ה' אֲשֶׁר עָמַדְתִּי לְפָנָיו אִם אֶקָּח, וַיִּפְצַר בּוֹ לָקַחַת וַיְמָאֵן. - And he said: As God lives, before whom I have stood, I will not take. And he urged him to take, but he refused.
The Malbim explains: strictly by the law, Elisha should have been forbidden to heal Naaman, for regarding gentiles it is said "we do not raise up and we do not bring down," and there is no obligation to heal them. What Elisha did was permitted only as a temporary ruling, so that the name of Heaven would be sanctified. If so, the entire purpose of the act was solely the sanctification of Hashem's name. And is it permitted to benefit from a sanctification of Hashem's name? After all, there is no private merit of yours here, everything was done for the sake of Heaven. Therefore "he urged him to take it, but he refused."
By the way, the fact that we heal gentiles nowadays is an obligation according to halacha. For if it were to become known, Heaven forbid, that a Jewish doctor does not treat a gentile, at that very moment many Jews around the world who depend on the kindness and medical care of gentiles would be harmed. For the same reason we even desecrate Shabbat to heal a gentile, something that in itself is absolutely forbidden. The law here is similar to performing surgery on an animal on Shabbat, which involves a severe desecration of Shabbat. It is always preferable to delay and do it in a permitted manner, but when a car accident victim arrives there is no choice, for the moment it is heard that a Jewish doctor did not treat a gentile, you bring Jews in dozens and thousands of places around the world into immediate danger to life, and this is literally a matter of saving life.
And who was accustomed to the expression "as Hashem lives, before whom I have stood"? Eliyahu the prophet. This is his phrase, whose meaning is: the Holy One, blessed be He, before whom I am accustomed to stand in prayer and service. The Radak says that Elisha learned this oath from Eliyahu his master.
וַיֹּאמֶר נַעֲמָן: וָלֹא יֻתַּן נָא לְעַבְדְּךָ מַשָּׂא צֶמֶד פְּרָדִים אֲדָמָה, כִּי לוֹא יַעֲשֶׂה עוֹד עַבְדְּךָ עֹלָה וָזֶבַח לֵאלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים כִּי אִם לַה'. - And Naaman said: If not, please let there be given to your servant a load of earth carried by a pair of mules, for your servant will no longer offer up burnt offering or sacrifice to other gods, but only to Hashem.
"If not" means: if you do not agree to take it, then I have another request of you. Give me a way that I may serve Hashem, blessed be He, who has done this kindness with me. My request is that I load onto two mules a large quantity of earth from the Holy Land, and from it I will build an altar, and upon it I will offer sacrifices to Hashem alone.
לַדָּבָר הַזֶּה יִסְלַח ה' לְעַבְדֶּךָ, בְּבוֹא אֲדֹנִי בֵית רִמּוֹן לְהִשְׁתַּחֲוֹת שָׁמָּה וְהוּא נִשְׁעָן עַל יָדִי וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוֵיתִי בֵּית רִמֹּן, בְּהִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָתִי בֵּית רִמֹּן יִסְלַח ה' לְעַבְדְּךָ בַּדָּבָר הַזֶּה. - For this matter may Hashem forgive your servant, when my master comes into the house of Rimmon to bow down there and he leans on my hand and I bow in the house of Rimmon, when I bow in the house of Rimmon may Hashem forgive your servant in this matter.
The verse appears garbled and awkward, and apparently it was difficult for Naaman to speak Hebrew. But the Malbim explains that there are two separate matters here.
The first matter: the king of Aram would go to the house of Rimmon, a place of idol worship, and Naaman would accompany him by virtue of his position as army commander, and the king would lean on him. And in order for the king to be able to bow down, the one on whom he leans must also bend down with him. It turns out that Naaman was forced to bend down during his master's bowing. Strictly by the law there is no prohibition in this, for he is not bowing but merely bending for the sake of the king's bowing, and the entire concern is on account of how it appears to others. This is similar to what they said in the Gemara, that if a thorn gets stuck in a person's foot in a place where there is idol worship, he should not bend down to remove it, for one who sees him will think he is bowing to the idol.
And something similar we find with Yaakov our father: when he entered Pharaoh's palace the lintel raised itself, for Pharaoh deliberately had a low lintel, so that everyone who entered would bend down. Such a trick exists to this day in the church in Bethlehem, which has a low lintel, and once a certain Jew was clever and entered backward. And one must know that it is forbidden to enter such places at all. And Yaakov did not need to bow down, for the lintel raised itself and he entered upright.
If so, regarding the first matter Naaman says: "For this matter may Hashem forgive your servant" - for the fact that when my master comes to bow down and he leans on my hand I am forced to bend down, this is a marginal problem of mere appearance, and I am confident that Hashem will forgive.
But there is a second matter: afterward, so that the king would not sense that Naaman was rejecting his idolatry, Naaman was forced to bow down himself, and this is now an independent act of bowing and not merely a result of the king leaning upon him, and in this there is a real prohibition. This is the meaning of "when I bow down in the temple of Rimmon," and about this he asks: "may Hashem forgive your servant."
And what is the meaning of the closing phrase "in this matter"? The Malbim explains: I am taking earth from here to build from it an altar upon which to serve Hashem alone. In the merit of this thing, that I take soil and make from it an altar of earth and bow down to Hashem your God, I ask that Hashem forgive me for that bowing that is done only for the honor of the king, so that he not be angry with me and think that I have rejected his idolatry.
Here the nature of a gentile is revealed: the gentile is a merchant, and even his service of Hashem is commerce. So too we find in Rashi regarding the red heifer, that a certain gentile calculated his loss and asked that Hashem return it to him. And so too the halacha: a gentile who prayed to Hashem and vowed charity, and then his son died, the money is unconsecrated and returns to his pocket, whereas a Jew who vowed charity and then his son died, the money goes to charity. What is the difference? The gentile is a merchant: Master of the Universe, You did not supply the merchandise, return the money. But the Jew says: I gave to charity, and what I gave I gave, Hashem gave and Hashem took away. This is the difference between a Jew and a gentile.
וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ: לֵךְ לְשָׁלוֹם, וַיֵּלֶךְ מֵאִתּוֹ כִּבְרַת אָרֶץ. - And he said to him: Go in peace. And he departed from him some distance.
By saying "go in peace," Elisha agreed to his words and told him that in this he would have forgiveness. "And he departed from him some distance" - he moved away a stretch of land.
וַיֹּאמֶר גֵּיחֲזִי נַעַר אֱלִישָׁע אִישׁ הָאֱלֹהִים: הִנֵּה חָשַׂךְ אֲדֹנִי אֶת נַעֲמָן הָאֲרַמִּי הַזֶּה מִקַּחַת מִיָּדוֹ אֵת אֲשֶׁר הֵבִיא, חַי ה' כִּי אִם רַצְתִּי אַחֲרָיו וְלָקַחְתִּי מֵאִתּוֹ מְאוּמָה. - And Gechazi, the attendant of Elisha the man of God, said: Behold, my master has spared this Naaman the Aramean from taking from his hand that which he brought, as Hashem lives, I will surely run after him and take something from him.
Gechazi complained that Elisha did not even take a fee for healing, and his argument was a scholarly one, for Gechazi was not an ignoramus but a Torah scholar. There is a halacha that it is forbidden to heal a gentile, and one who does heal him is not permitted to heal him for free but only for a fee. And why did he heal for free here? Indeed there was a concern about accepting a fee from him, as was explained, lest he go and give thanks to idolatry, and this is the intent of his words: "Behold, my master has spared this Naaman the Aramean" - because of his being an Aramean and a gentile, out of concern that he would go and give thanks to idolatry, he did not take a gift from him, and in this he acted according to the law. But "as Hashem lives, I will surely run after him and take something from him" - something at any rate he ought to have taken.
And see how far things go: when a person wants money, all arguments are valid. Heaven forbid that I care about the money, I am only concerned for the halacha that one does not heal a gentile for free. But the truth is that what bothered him was that the money was not taken.
וַיִּרְדֹּף גֵּיחֲזִי אַחֲרֵי נַעֲמָן, וַיִּרְאֶה נַעֲמָן רָץ אַחֲרָיו וַיִּפֹּל מֵעַל הַמֶּרְכָּבָה לִקְרָאתוֹ וַיֹּאמֶר: הֲשָׁלוֹם. - And Gechazi pursued after Naaman, and Naaman saw him running after him and got down from the chariot to meet him and said: Is all well?
"And he fell from the chariot" - he jumped down from the chariot toward him. "Is all well?" Is everything alright? I see you running, has something happened?
וַיֹּאמֶר שָׁלוֹם, אֲדֹנִי שְׁלָחַנִי לֵאמֹר: הִנֵּה עַתָּה זֶה בָּאוּ אֵלַי שְׁנֵי נְעָרִים מֵהַר אֶפְרַיִם מִבְּנֵי הַנְּבִיאִים, תְּנָה נָּא לָהֶם כִּכַּר כֶּסֶף וּשְׁתֵּי חֲלִפוֹת בְּגָדִים. - And he said: All is well. My master has sent me to say: Behold, just now two young men from the sons of the prophets have come to me from Mount Ephraim; please give them a talent of silver and two changes of clothing.
Naaman should immediately have wondered: how could it be that the master flatly refused to accept anything, and suddenly the servant comes running to ask? The matter is suspicious. Geichazi therefore needed to construct a cover story, and he built it cleverly: just now something happened that had not been the case before, young men arrived, and the request is not for the prophet himself but for them. In other words, the prophet stands by his word and asks nothing for himself, only for others who have nothing.
וַיֹּאמֶר נַעֲמָן: הוֹאֵל קַח כִּכָּרָיִם, וַיִּפְרָץ בּוֹ, וַיָּצַר כִּכְּרַיִם כֶּסֶף בִּשְׁנֵי חֲרִטִים וּשְׁתֵּי חֲלִפוֹת בְּגָדִים, וַיִּתֵּן אֶל שְׁנֵי נְעָרָיו וַיִּשְׂאוּ לְפָנָיו. - And Naaman said: Be willing, take two talents. And he pressed him, and he bound up two talents of silver in two bags, along with two changes of clothing, and he gave them to his two young men, and they carried them before him.
In its plain sense, "hoel" means: be so kind as to take. "Vayifrotz bo" is like "vayiftzar bo" (and he pressed him), with the letters transposed, in the way we find kevess and keses (lamb), salmah and simlah (garment), kahal and lahak (from mak'helah and lahakah, meaning assembly). "Charitim" are two sacks or pouches, long bags.
One must understand: what is meant by "Be willing, take two talents," and why were two young men needed to carry two talents of silver and two changes of clothing? This is surely not a load that a single person could not carry on his own.
וַיָּבֹא אֶל הָעֹפֶל וַיִּקַּח מִיָּדָם וַיִּפְקֹד בַּבָּיִת, וַיְשַׁלַּח אֶת הָאֲנָשִׁים וַיֵּלֵכוּ. - And he came to the Ophel, and took it from their hand, and deposited it in the house, and he sent the men away, and they went.
And there is a further question: what is meant by "and he sent the men away"? If he had reached the appropriate place, they would go on their way in any case, so why did he need to send them off?
The Malbim explains: Naaman was in doubt whether the young man had truly come on the prophet's mission or whether there was some deception here, and he had a feeling about it. He therefore said to him "hoel," which is a term of an oath, as Rashi explains. Similarly we find "And Moshe was willing (vayoel) to dwell with the man," where he swore to him that his firstborn son would be given over to idolatry. In other words: swear to me, and take double. And for the same reason he sent two young men with him, in order to verify the address and where the money would arrive: whether the prophet would receive it, or whether the young man would take it for himself.
Geichazi was worried about this: that they might accompany him all the way to the city, and there it would be revealed that the whole thing had been a deception. Therefore, when he arrived at the Ophel, which is a fortress outside the city, "and he took it from their hand and deposited it in the house." In its plain sense this means that he set it down in the house, but the Malbim explains that he entered the house and conducted himself there as the master of the house, as one who commands and gives orders: behold, men have arrived, do such and such. In this way he won their trust, so that it seemed to them that they had reached the destination and that this was the place to set down the money, and that he was not some mouse hiding away funds. Therefore he also had to send them off, for they had originally come to give it into the prophet's hand, and suddenly it turned out that they were releasing the money before it had reached his hand. But because of the impression he had made upon them, they were sent off and went.
וְהוּא בָא וַיַּעֲמֹד אֶל אֲדֹנָיו, וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו אֱלִישָׁע: מֵאַיִן גֵּחֲזִי? וַיֹּאמֶר: לֹא הָלַךְ עַבְדְּךָ אָנֶה וָאָנָה. - And he came in and stood before his master, and Elisha said to him: Where have you been, Geichazi? And he said: Your servant went nowhere at all.
"From where" - where have you come from? And he answers: I did not go here or there, I stepped outside for a bit, walked around, nothing special.
וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו: לֹא לִבִּי הָלַךְ כַּאֲשֶׁר הָפַךְ אִישׁ מֵעַל מֶרְכַּבְתּוֹ לִקְרָאתֶךָ, הַעֵת לָקַחַת אֶת הַכֶּסֶף וְלָקַחַת בְּגָדִים וְזֵיתִים וּכְרָמִים וְצֹאן וּבָקָר וַעֲבָדִים וּשְׁפָחוֹת. - And he said to him: Did my heart not go along, when the man turned back from his chariot to meet you? Is this a time to take money, and to take clothing and olive groves and vineyards and sheep and cattle and menservants and maidservants?
"My heart did not go" can be explained in two ways. The first, as a statement: my heart did not leave me, my perception did not desert me, and I still know where you were. The second, as a question: did my heart not go with you? Did my heart not accompany you the whole way? Do you think I do not know exactly where you were?
"Is this a time to take money" - now is not the time to take money. For had I accepted payment, it would have appeared as though everything happened by natural means, and if there is no miracle here, the name of Heaven is not sanctified. I deliberately took no money, and now you come and reduce a moment of sanctifying God's name into small change, into something material and physical?
And not only that. Had you taken the money for a lofty purpose, and told me there was a matter of saving a life, a patient who needed to be flown abroad, a surgery costing a hundred thousand dollars, even then I would not have justified you, for there is a desecration of God's name in it, but there would have been room to judge favorably and understand that there is an urgent, essential need. But "is this a time to take money," and he had not yet bought anything with it, rather he intended to take it in order to "take clothing and olive groves and vineyards and sheep and cattle and menservants and maidservants," all of these luxuries. You went to take money for private pleasures? That doubles the wrong.
At first glance this is puzzling: how could Geichazi not fear that the prophet would know? Let me tell a story that happened with the Rav of Brisk. Once he was sitting at home with several people and needed something from the kitchen. He sent one of them to see whether a certain item was there. A chasid sitting there said: With us, with my Rebbe, there is no need to send someone to check what is in the kitchen, the Rebbe knows through ruach hakodesh. The Rav of Brisk answered him: With us we use ruach hakodesh to know what is in the Tosafot, to understand the Gemara. Not to know what is in the refrigerator.
From here we learn that the lad understood that even though the prophet knows many things, he does not use his ruach hakodesh for everything, and the Holy One, blessed be He, does not reveal everything to the prophet, as we find with Elisha himself: "And God has hidden it from me and has not told me." And therefore he thought that perhaps precisely this he would not know.
And this is what we see throughout all of history: when a person has a craving or desire for something, he rationalizes himself with all sorts of excuses. Take Pharaoh: you are going to fight against God? And what is his answer? At sea He is strong, but on dry land I can overcome Him. And what logic is there in this distinction? None. I want something, so I will find the distinction. Exactly so here: he wanted it, and therefore told himself that perhaps precisely this God would not want to reveal, and perhaps he would succeed. That was his calculation.
וְצָרַעַת נַעֲמָן תִּדְבַּק בְּךָ וּבְזַרְעֲךָ לְעוֹלָם, וַיֵּצֵא מִלְּפָנָיו מְצֹרָע כַּשָּׁלֶג. - And the tzaraat of Naaman shall cling to you and to your offspring forever; and he went out from before him leprous as snow.
And why also his offspring? What did his sons sin? Rather, the sons he had until now knew about the matter and helped him, and therefore they were stricken along with him. This refers to the sons he has now, not to those destined to be born.
And at a deeper level Elisha told him: know this, it is impossible to take from Naaman only the silver and the gold. It is a package deal. If you took the silver and the gold, you also took the leprosy. You cannot say this I take and that I do not take. If you took, you took it all.
The holy Zohar (part 3, page 51a) relates that Rabbi Yitzchak and Rabbi Yehuda were walking on the road. Rabbi Yehuda said: it is written "and the leprosy of Naaman shall cleave to you and to your offspring forever"; if he sinned, why should his sons be stricken? He answered him: Elisha saw more than the other prophets, and he saw that no worthy and fitting son would come forth from Gehazi, and therefore he cursed them all.
Moreover, this is what Elisha said to him: I served the prophet Eliyahu with a lofty service, with great self sacrifice and with excellent service, and therefore I merited a double portion, as he requested "let a double portion of your spirit be upon me," for I served him truly. But you are wicked, you harmed me: "you swore falsely" and you coveted money. And in this you harmed the name of the prophet, for how do things appear in Naaman's eyes? At first the prophet told me I do not need it, and suddenly he sent to ask for it. The impression is very bad, as if the prophet regretted it and thought it a pity that he had not asked.
And one who swears falsely and covets money is as though he transgressed the entire Torah, and one who transgressed this dies to the World to Come, meaning you should have lost eternity. But because you served me, your service is not for nothing, and therefore your death will be in this world and not in the World to Come. Therefore "the leprosy of Naaman shall cleave to you and to your offspring." It emerges according to the Zohar that this curse was a kindness to him, for through it his death would be here and he would not lose his portion in the World to Come.
According to this it emerges from the Zohar that he has a share in the World to Come, yet seemingly in Perek Chelek the Gemara counts Gehazi among those who have no share in the World to Come. It is possible that the Zohar disagrees, but this is astonishing, for there it is an explicit Mishnah, and the matter requires further study.
In the work "Megaleh Amukot" (ofan 213) he explains the prayers of Moshe Rabbeinu, and brings 515 explanations corresponding to the 515 shades of prayer that Moshe prayed. One of the explanations: Moshe Rabbeinu saw the generation of Elisha, in which Naaman was an army commander, and he is one of four people who gave acknowledgment to the Creator of the world.
Yitro acknowledged, except that he still left room for idolatry, as it says "now I know that the Lord is greater than all the gods," meaning He is greater than them, implying that they too have some power. Naaman acknowledged partially and at a higher level: "now I know that there is a God in Israel." Rahav was higher than them, for she crowned the Holy One, blessed be He, in the heavens and on the earth. And Moshe Rabbeinu crowned Him even in the void of the world, as it says "for the Lord, He is God in the heavens above and on the earth beneath, there is none else."
Therefore it is said regarding Naaman "when my master comes to Beit Rimon": Rimon is an acronym of those four - reish for Rahav, yud for Yitro, mem for Moshe, nun for Naaman. And for this reason the Pesach offering is roasted on a spit of pomegranate wood, for all of these concern the nullification of idolatry, and the Pesach offering too is a nullification of idolatry: they take the god of Egypt, slaughter it, eat it, and whatever remains they burn. Therefore a spit of pomegranate wood, an acronym of those four who nullified idolatry through their words, and the name of Heaven was sanctified through them.
The "Megaleh Amukot" adds further: "There is nothing in the world that is not hinted at in the Torah." So where is Naaman's cure through bathing in the Jordan hinted at? There are eleven verses in Tanach that begin with the letter nun and end with the letter nun, and three of them are in the Torah. These three verses were the sign for Elisha to know what Naaman's cure would be, for Naaman's name is unique in that it begins with a nun and ends with a nun.
The first verse: "נֶגַע צָרַעַת כִּי תִהְיֶה בְּאָדָם וְהוּבָא אֶל הַכֹּהֵן" - "When a person has a mark of tzaraat, he shall be brought to the kohen" - here we have a description of the illness, the leper. The second verse: "נָבִיא מִקִּרְבְּךָ מֵאַחֶיךָ כָּמֹנִי יָקִים לְךָ ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֵלָיו תִּשְׁמָעוּן" - "A prophet from among you, from your brothers, like me, Hashem your God will raise up for you; to him you shall listen" - here we have the healer. Still missing is the remedy, and that is the third verse: "נַחְנוּ נַעֲבֹר חֲלוּצִים לִפְנֵי ה' אֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן" - "We shall cross over armed before Hashem to the land of Canaan," and there the crossing of the Jordan is mentioned - here we have that the cure is in the Jordan. Therefore Elisha instructed him that his purification and cleansing would come about through the Jordan. Whoever wishes may study there at length, for he brings a further lengthy explanation and wonderful hints and acronyms.
Chapter 5 sets two men opposite each other: Naaman the Aramean, who came from afar, was cured, and recognized that there is no God in all the earth except in Israel, to the point that he requested soil to build from it an altar to Hashem; and Gechazi, the prophet's attendant and a Torah scholar, who was inside and turned the great sanctification of God's name into a few coins, into garments and vineyards. Elisha refused to take payment because the entire cure was permitted only as a temporary directive for the sake of sanctifying Heaven's name, while Gechazi, who sought to find a permission for his craving, built a cover story, swore falsely, and took along with the money also the tzaraat. From here comes a great lesson: when a person craves something, he will always find himself a halachic or logical excuse, and only a pure heart knows how to discern when it is "a time to take" and when specifically refraining is the honor of Heaven.