ויקרא, פרק י״ג, פסוק ה׳

After a week of tense isolation, a critical moment of decision arrives. The afflicted individual undergoes a second examination to determine whether they will be declared pure, require further isolation, or be pronounced entirely impure. This inspection must take place specifically during the daytime, and ideally during the middle hours of the day. At this time, the sunlight is neither too harsh nor too dim, ensuring that the examining priest has the most accurate visibility possible [מלבי״ם, אדרת אליהו, רד״צ הופמן].

The authority to evaluate the affliction rests exclusively with a priest. This divine decree ensures that the priest does more than merely diagnose a physical condition; he guides the individual to reflect upon their actions and prays on their behalf. Through this exclusive responsibility, the priests also develop profound clinical expertise in distinguishing between various types of skin conditions [ספורנו].

When the priest finds that the affliction has remained unchanged, the situation is assessed entirely by its appearance at that exact moment on the seventh day. Even if the blemish fluctuated during the week—perhaps growing and then shrinking back, or changing color before returning to its original hue—it is treated as if no change ever occurred [מלבי״ם, פרדס יוסף]. Other commentators suggest that this assessment simply confirms the persistent presence of the affliction exactly as it was from the start [הכתב והקבלה].

There are two primary ways to understand how this unchanged state is determined. The first approach suggests that the evaluation relies entirely on the priest's own eyesight and professional judgment, without the need for physical measuring tools [רמב״ן, רבנו בחיי, הטור הארוך, דעת זקנים, בכור שור]. The second approach maintains that the assessment refers to the visual appearance and color of the affliction itself, indicating that it has retained its original size and hue [רש״י, אבן עזרא, שפתי חכמים]. According to this second perspective, the visual criteria account for multiple shades. Even if the specific hue of the blemish shifted, it is still considered unchanged as long as it remains within the spectrum of the four colors categorized as impure. Only if it fades to a distinctively pure color does the status change [מזרחי, רלב״ג, לבוש האורה, גור אריה, רד״צ הופמן].

In addition to remaining unchanged in appearance, the affliction must not have spread to the surrounding healthy skin [רלב״ג]. The emphasis on the lack of spreading serves an important legal purpose: it implies that had the blemish expanded during the initial week, the individual would have been immediately declared completely impure [רש״י, ברטנורא, שפתי חכמים]. Even though the affliction has not grown or deepened, a second period of isolation is still mandated out of concern that it might develop further [העמק דבר].

Consequently, the priest orders a second seven-day quarantine. The directive implies a direct continuity between the two periods. The seventh day of the first quarantine serves simultaneously as the first day of the second, resulting in a total of thirteen days of isolation rather than fourteen [תורה תמימה, חזקוני, מלבי״ם, רד״צ הופמן]. This extended confinement serves a dual purpose. Socially, it protects the community from potential infection. Physically, it allows the individual's body to rest and recover. If the affliction intensifies despite this period of rest, it becomes clear that the condition is a severe, underlying infection rather than a temporary skin blemish [רלב״ג].