Parshat Korach - Augmented Reality

This week's parsha features the rebellion of Korach and his followers against Moshe. Korach's main point of contention was Moshe's appointment of Elizaphan Ben Uziel as a Nasi, despite the fact that, in terms of age, Korach was next in line for this position. Korach, perceiving this to be a fabrication of the Will of Hashem, gathered together two-hundred and fifty heads of the Assembly to challenge Moshe's leadership.

The Midrash Tanchuma asks a deeply penetrating question regarding the motives of Korach: "Korach was a clever man; what did he see that brought him to such foolishness?” The Midrash answers: "His eyes misled him, for he saw a great chain of descendants emerging from him: Shmuel Hanavi, who was as important as Moshe and Aharon, as it says in Tehillim (99:6) 'Moshe and Aharon were among his priests and Shmuel was among those who invoke his name.'" Korach saw from the fact that Shmuel is mentioned in the same sentence as Moshe and Aharon, that Shmuel is just as important as them. He then took this as proof that he, an ancestor of Shmuel, was rightful in mounting this rebellion.

Korach's line of reasoning is very difficult to understand. He feels that he is justified in replacing Moshe and Aharon as leader because he saw that one of his descendants will be a very important person. How does his offspring prove that he is fitting to be a leader? If Shmuel himself were leading this rebellion, then the argument would make sense: Shmuel is just as important as Moshe and Aharon, so perhaps he could be fitting to lead in their place. But what does Shmuel's greatness say about Korach's own worthiness? Furthermore, this thought process only proves the very opposite of Korach's entire goal. Inherent in his argument is the assumption that Moshe and Aharon are men of spiritual greatness themselves (i.e. Shmuel is as great as them.) But yet, he claims that Moshe and Aharon are unfitting, and that they are fabricating the will of Hashem! How can they be great enough to prove his own greatness, yet not great enough to be the rightful leaders?

How can Korach make such an incredibly illogical argument?

From here we can gain tremendous insight into the devastating effect of a negiah (a personal bias) on an otherwise straight-thinking individual.

Rav Yecheskel Weinfeld Shlit”a explains that there are two ways that a negiah can manifest in a person. In the first, the person is uninterested in the facts that might prove him wrong and simply ignores them. Such a person is so stubborn and set in their ways, that they refuse to consider anything that may move them from their belief; they walk through life with proverbial blinders over their eyes. Then there is a second, more pernicious type of bias. This is when the person willingly examines the facts, but he is so engulfed in his prism of reality that these facts cannot disprove his notions and theories. On the contrary – all the facts in the world only serve to corroborate him!

This second level of negiah, even a minutely subconscious one, can skew a person's reality with absolutely newfangled, misguided interpretations, all just in order to justify his desired worldview. No matter that others don't understand or agree with a word he says – and tell him he's crazy – for this person is so locked in his ideas that he concludes everyone else is crazy!

This was the downfall of Korach. His main thrust to overtake Moshe and Aharon – his negiah – was his desire for honor. This bias led him so far astray that he came to the ridiculous conclusion that he was fitting to be a leader, and argue that he had been unjustly denied a position of authority, all through a faulty line of reasoning. Shmuel, the progeny who “proved” his worthiness, and would himself have been fitting for the job, would not be born for generations. Additionally, his logic caused him to mount a rebellion against leaders whom he himself inherently admitted were great and holy men!

This clarifies another difficulty in the sedrah as well.

It's interesting to note that this Midrash cited above is only quoted by Rashi much later in the episode (16:7), after Korach has already begun his rebellion. Seemingly, if the Midrash is explaining Korach’s motives, wouldn't it have made more sense for Rashi to quote it in the beginning? However in light of our explanation we can understand that Korach’s thought process was really post-facto; once he already decided to rebel, his bias forced him to conjure up a justification for his actions. Meaning that Rashi implicitly understood that the real, initial motivation for Korach’s actions was the appointment of Elizaphan, and the Midrash only comes to tell us this this was Korach’s second-thought.

This explanation also sheds a new light both on the Midrash and on a fundamental question in our parsha. The Midrash says "His eyes mistook him for he saw a great chain of descendant's emerging from him." Seemingly, Korach saw this with ruach hakodesh. If he was of the caliber to be able to merit these lofty visions, doesn't that perhaps lend some credence to his claim of personal greatness? How could such a great person be so misled? However, now we can understand that when a person is unaware of his subliminal biases, it can bring ruin upon him. It can even turn his positive traits against him. The Sefas Emes quotes the Chozeh of Lublin in regards to what we can learn from Korach: when a person is not self-aware, even ruach hakodesh is destructive! The need to be aware of our biases is so great because the damage they can wreak on our lives can be monumental.

Rav Yisrael Salanter called this necessity to be self-aware, the avodah of דע את עצמך – “to know thyself”. L’ehavdil, this idea goes back to Plato and the pre-Socratic philosophers, most notably Thales of Miletus. Benjamin Franklin, in his 1750 Poor Richard's Almanack observed, “There are three things extremely hard: steel, a diamond, and to know one’s self.” Even the wise men of the world were cognizant of the potential damage that an unchecked bias can cause.

Though it is extremely difficult to do, if we can challenge ourselves to become more attuned to our inner workings and subliminal thoughts, we can avoid being led astray from our tasks in life. May we merit the strength to realize – and subsequently overcome – our biases, and may we be able to see reality in a pure form that will allow us to fulfill the true will of Hashem.

Shabbat Shalom 

Parshat Shelach - From Reaction to Action: A National Hysteria

This week's parsha contains the episode of the spies. The Meraglim were sent to scout the Land of Israel, for the future settling of the Jewish People there. G-d comes to Moshe saying: “Send forth for yourself men, and let them spy out the Land of Canaan” (Bamidbar 13:2). Noting the interesting additional phrase לך (for you), Rashi quotes the Midrash Tanchuma which says that the idea to send out the spies was not a commandment from Hashem – rather it was a response to the people's request to do so.

When the spies come back, all of them (aside from Yehoshua Bin Nun and Calev Ben Yefuneh) deliver negative reports of Eretz Yisrael. Thoroughly scaring the Nation, the Meraglim cast doubt in the hearts of the people about entering the Land.

The Torah recounts the entire response of the Nation:

“The people wept that night. All the Children of Israel murmured against Moshe and Aharon, and the entire assembly said to them, “If only that we had died in the land of Egypt, or if only that we had died in the wilderness! Why is Hashem bringing us to this land to fall by the sword? Our wives and young children will be taken captive! Is it not better for us to return to Egypt?’ So they said to one another, ‘Let us appoint a leader and let us return to Egypt!’ (ibid. 14:1-4).

Distressed upon hearing the Nation's hysterical response, “Moshe and Aharon fell on their faces before the entire congregation of the assembly of the children of Israel” (ibid. 5).

In analyzing the verses, there seem to be two parts or stages of the Nation's response to the report of the Meraglim. The Nation first responds by speaking to Moshe and Aharon and questioning why G-d would bring them out to the desert to die. They also add “Is it better not for us to return to Egypt?” That is the first stage. In the second stage, they speak amongst themselves and act upon their doubts: “They said to one another ‘let us appoint a leader and let us return to Egypt!’”

Towards which part is Moshe and Aharon’s response? One might have expected Moshe and Aharon to react to stage one – to the blasphemous statements hurled towards them. However, it seems from the pesukim that they “fell on their faces” only directly after B’nei Yisrael said, “Let us appoint a leader and let us return to Egypt.” The fact that B’nei Yisrael were doubting Hashem did not immediately elicit the great distress of Moshe and Aharon. Rather, only once the Nation expressed the desire to appoint a new leader did they respond in such a fashion. What was it about this second stage that so greatly distressed Moshe and Aharon more than the first?

I would like to suggest the following: One could reason that the initial fear of the people was not only understandable, but perhaps even justifiable. The response of hysteria to the fear-mongering reports would be natural, especially when we examine the intentions of the Meraglim. The Midrashim are rife with explanations impugning the motives of the spies; how they added superfluous details just in order to scare the Nation. For example, the spies mention: “Amalek dwells in the area of the south” (ibid. 13:29). Rashi quotes the Midrash Tanchuma that points to their ulterior motives for mentioning Amalek: “Since they [B’nei Yisrael] had already been ‘burned’ by Amalek, [i.e. previously having had a war with them] the spies mentioned it in order to strike fear in them.” Is it any surprise, then, that the Nation was indeed scared?

However, the test of life is not about how we initially react, but how we let that affect us. The mistake the people made was not in being afraid; the mistake was letting that fear overtake them, and lead them down a path of devastation. This is, in my opinion, the key to understanding Moshe and Aharon's response. Moshe and Aharon implicitly felt that for the Nation to respond in fear and worry was ultimately justifiable – how could they react any differently to such terrifying news? However, when they heard the people conspire and say: “Let us appoint a leader and let us return to Egypt!”– that conclusion elicited Moshe and Aharon’s intense reaction. This was, in fact, devastating. That the people, rather than confront their fear and filter it through their logical thought processes (which if they had done they would have surely recalled G-d’s unending devotion to them), followed their fear down the dark and winding road towards blasphemy, leading them to conclude to return to Egypt. This response was unforgivable, and would ultimately barr this generation from entering the Land of Israel.*

Too often we guilt ourselves when we don't initially respond the way we would like. But that is not always the test! Sometimes, our challenges are too difficult and we cannot expect more of ourselves. However, what is in our hands is if we let that emotion or fear overtake us, causing us to come to false judgements and conclusions about the world, the people we love, but more so – ourselves. Sometimes all that is needed is for us to slow down, give ourselves and others a chance, and make our decisions with a level-head. And when we think it through, we can be confident in the knowledge that Hashem is always with us.

Shabbat Shalom

*So great was the Nation’s unwarranted panic and crying, it would serve as the catalyst for our national cry of thousands of years: Tisha B’Av. The Gemara in Ta’anit (29a) tells us: “That night was the night of the Ninth of Av. The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to them: You wept needlessly that night, and I will therefore establish for you a true tragedy over which there will be weeping in future generations.” It is interesting to note that what is highlighted as their sin is that they “wept needlessly”. In light of our explanation, their weeping would not have been needless had they allowed it to lead them towards greater faith and reliance upon G-d. However, since their weeping only resulted in furthering them from G-d and taking negative action, it retroactively was characterized as needless.

Parshat Beha'alotcha - Lighting Up the Nation

This week's parsha begins: “Hashem spoke to Moshe, saying, Speak to Aharon and say to him: When you kindle the lamps, towards the face of the Menorah shall the seven lamps cast light” (8:1-2). Aharon was given the task of lighting the Menorah in the Mikdash.

The previous parsha, Parshat Naso, featured the inaugural offerings of the נשיאים, where each tribe was represented. The juxtaposition of these parshiot raises a question: The portion featuring the Menorah and its directives appeared earlier in the Torah, prior to the parsha of the Nesiim. Thus would we have expected the chapter on preparations for the Menorah to occur earlier. Why does it appear now?

The Be’er Basadeh, a commentary on Rashi, tells us that from this difficulty, it is clear that the placement of this parsha next to the parsha of the Nesiim, shows that it is directly connected to their offerings. Therefore, Rashi quotes the Midrash Tanchuma here: Why was the passage dealing with the Menorah placed next to the passage of the Nesiim? Because Aharon saw the inauguration, and he felt badly, for neither he nor his tribe was represented among them. G-d, seeing Aharon's sadness tries to comfort him: “I swear by your life, your portion is greater than theirs, for you kindle and prepare the lamps.”

The Ramban asks a very strong question: Why is Aharon only now comforted, by the Mitzvah of the Menorah? Why wasn't he comforted with the Ketoret, a service done every day, morning and night? Why isn’t he comforted by the entire Yom Kippur service – the holiest of the year! Not only was he privy to entering the Holy of Holies, but only he was permitted to enter, something the other tribes were not allowed to do. In light of these questions, the Ramban (quoting Rabbeinu Nissim Gaon) says that the mitzvah of Menorah is not only referring to the Menorah in the Mikdash, but also referring to the miracle of Chanukah, and the mitzvah of Neirot Chanukah, which would last forever. That is Aharon’s comfort.

Yet still one could ask, why was this issue generated only after seeing the Nesiim? And what was it in particular about the mitzvah of the Menorah that comforted Aharon, in connection to the Nesiim?

I would humbly like to suggest the following approach. And in the traditional Jewish way, we will answer a question with a few more questions:

The Rambam rules (ביאת מקדש ט:ז) that despite the fact that there is a general prohibition for a זר (non-Kohen) to perform services in the Mikdash (as it is set aside for the Kohen) a non-Kohen is allowed to light the Menorah (assuming the Menorah was brought out of the Kodesh and into the outer courtyard where non-Kohanim are allowed to enter). The common explanation of this Rambam is that the kindling of the Menorah is not an עבודה, thus it does not necessitate a Kohen to do the actual lighting; even a זר is allowed to perform this service. However, the Raavad asks: that the kindling is not considered an עבודה only allows for the fact that if the non-Kohen lit it, it would not disqualify the lighting. But who says that it allows for a non-Kohen to light the Menorah לכתחילה? Furthermore, other Mefarshim are troubled with this Rambam, for doesn’t the Torah say explicitly, “Speak to Aharon”? This would imply that it is a mitzvah specific only to the Kohen Gadol. So how is it acceptable for a זר to light the Menorah?

In his magnum opus on the Rambam, Rav Chaim Soloveitchik זצוק״ל explains that we see clearly from the Rambam a different understanding in the nature of the mitzvah of Menorah. Rav Chaim sets down the principle that the mitzvah of the Menorah is not to light it, rather the mitzvah of the Menorah is for it to be lit. The only obligation incumbent upon the Kohen is to prepare the wicks of the Menorah, known as הטבת הנרות. As long as the wicks were prepared by the Kohen, we are not concerned with how or why or by whom the Menorah is lit, as long as it is lit. Therefore, even a non-Kohen may do the lighting. According to the Rambam, it follows that the mitzvah of the Menorah is not specific to Kohanim; rather anyone can do it.

Seemingly, this understanding of the halacha detracts from the exclusivity of Menorah to the Kohanim. And if the mitzvah of the Menorah is not reserved for Aharon and his tribe, how was it a comfort to him? Wasn't Aharon bothered that he wasn't represented with the dedication offerings, like the Nesiim? Furthermore, the only aspect mitzvah that is exclusive to the Kohen is simply the preparation of the lights – a seemingly menial job of clearing out the used wicks and oil of the previous day – something that surely isn't befitting of the honor due to the Priests. How does it help to give him this mitzvah, in which he only plays an ancillary part?

To explain this we must go back and understand what was so special about the offerings of the Nesiim. Every Nasi brought the same exact offering, and the Midrash explains that each Nasi decided to do this so so as not to cause a feeling of one-upmanship, thus promoting a sense of community, peace and unity among them all. The Baalei Mussar tell us that this was a manifestation of the greater unity that the Jewish People had at that time. They were sensitive to each other's feelings, desiring only to serve G-d, rather than let their offerings devolve into a showing of haughtiness and wealth. The fact that the tribe leaders chose to refrain from “standing out” from each other, despite their potential ability to be extravagant in their offerings, showed the unity and humility of the nation’s leaders. It served as a lesson for future generations that one can be unique without the need to overtly and externally separate oneself from the greater whole.

Perhaps Aharon HaKohen, the most removed and regal member of a separate class (Kohanim) from an already removed tribe (Levi), desired to have his share in this unity. Aharon, being an אוהב שלום ורודף שלום also wished to avoid “standing out.” Therefore, G-d gave him the mitzvah of lighting the Menorah. The Menorah, though situated in the Mikdash, is applicable to all, not just the Priestly class. This was the answer to his discomfort, for this mitzvah was in essence quite appropriate for someone as humble as he. With it, he performed the simple (yet important) task of cleaning the Menorah, and the actual lighting was not given exclusively to him and his tribe, but rather was a reminder that all have a share in this Avodah*. The fact that the kindling of the Menorah does not need to be done by a Kohen is a perfect extension of the message derived from offerings of the Nesiim and it is only logical that the Menorah and its preparation would follow after their offerings. Just as the Nesiim chose to refrain from adding to their offerings for the sake of brotherhood, Aharon was also taking part in this value with the mitzvah of the Menorah.

Aharon HaKohen shows us that there is a duality in Judaism. While we each have our own special place and role, we also fit into a greater, larger picture – one which will suffer if we chose to emphasize our role too much, or choose to minimize and deny it altogether. It is most fitting for us to learn this lesson of unity and humility from the Kohen Gadol himself, who stands at a unique place in the Jewish hierarchy. It is then up to each one of us to recognize and honor our own role and become a unified part of the greater whole. May we each find success in this endeavor.

Shabbat Shalom

*This fits well with Chazal’s advice of how to become wise: בבא בתרא כה:) הרוצה שיחכים ידרים) – One who desires to become wise should turn towards the south when praying. The Menorah was situated to the south in the Mikdash and the Menorah was symbolic of Torah as the pasuk says כי נר מצוה ותורה אור. Torah is truly the common denominator between all the people of the nation, rich or poor, a Mamzer or Kohen Gadol! Everyone is equally obligated to study it, and is capable of mastering it. Thus it is only fitting that the lighting of the Menorah itself would be a point of commonality and unity among the nation.

Parshat Bamidbar - A Mini Har Sinai

With this week’s parsha we begin a new book in the Torah – Sefer Bamidbar. The central focus of this book is the laws and history of the Mishkan as the Jews travel through the desert.

The Ramban (Shemot 25:1, 35:1) points out that there are many interesting parallels between the building of the Mishkan and that of the revelation at Har Sinai. From this comparison we learn that the Mishkan, the Beit Hamikdash, and later the community synagogue are meant to serve as reminders of the experience the Jews had at Har Sinai. When the Torah was given, the Shechina rested among the Nation. So too, in the Mishkan (as well as the Beit Hamikdash and the Beit Haknesset) the Shechinah resides permanently in our מקדשי מעט (Megillah 29a), and we have the opportunity to re-enter the experience we had at the giving of the Torah.

Perhaps we can carry the Ramban’s concept a bit further. The beginning of the parsha deals with the counting of the Nation, yet Hashem specifically commands Moshe, “ But you shall not count the tribe of Levi, and you shall not take a census of them among the Children of Israel” (Bamidbar 1:49). At first glance this is very interesting – why does Hashem give the command not to count Levi? Are they not part of the Nation as well? Rashi explains that it was because the tribe of Levi did not sin with the golden calf at Har Sinai, and therefore they are not to be counted with the rest of the Nation, but rather as a separate entity. Because the Leviim  did not sin with the golden calf, they have an elevated status.

Immediately after this commandment, Hashem directs Moshe to entrust the tribe of Levi with the assembling, disassembling, transporting and guarding of the Mishkan. One might ask why it was that specifically the tribe of Levi was chosen? In what were they meritorious, and what connection does it have with the Mishkan?

However, according to the aforementioned Ramban and Rashi, the connection between the Leviim and the work in the Mishkan is obvious. As we know, the Nation reached incredible spiritual heights at the revelation by Har Sinai. To have Hashem’s Divine Presence revealed was the most seminal moment of holiness in this world, and its power still reverberates through the generations. According to our tradition (Avoda Zarah 22b, Yevamot 103b), the Nation reached the same level that Adam Harishon was on before the sin of the Tree of Knowledge. But this was dashed when the Nation erred with the golden calf, causing them to tumble from their lofty level. However, one tribe remained steadfast in their devotion to Hashem; this was the tribe of Levi. In withstanding from sinning, the tribe of Levi retained the holiness which was reached at the revelation.

Since the Leviim were the only ones who did not sin at Har Sinai and therefore the only ones who did not fall from this high level, it stands to reason that only they could do the service in the Mishkan, this “mini-Har Sinai”. The Leviim would serve as constant, tangible reminders of the Divine revelation that was witnessed by all of the Nation at Har Sinai.

We see that in choosing Levi, Hashem is once again highlighting the connection between Har Sinai and the Mishkan, the Beit Hamikdash, and the Shul. We may often take for granted the level of holiness that we can achieve by entering our local shuls, and the proper respect with which they are to be treated.

With Shavuot approaching, it is quite appropriate to ingrain in ourselves this lesson and cultivate this value. For while we did not consciously experience the giving of the Torah personally, we have the incredible opportunity to tap back into the level that was reached there – every time we enter a shul to daven or learn! We can take this idea to heart by behaving in shul as though we are visiting the Shechinah, and we too can merit to be on the level of the Leviim. We should be zoche to see the return of the Beit Hamikdash, where we can once again perform the Holy Service, speedily in our days. Amen.

Shabbat Shalom and Chag Sameach

Parshas Behar - Bechukotai: A Labor Of Love

This week's parsha, Bechukotai, tells us of the many blessings that G-d would bestow upon us “If you will go in my statutes and observe my commandments…” (Vayikra 26:3). Rain shall come, the fruits of the field shall be plentiful, and peace will be in the land.

We would think that such bountiful rewards refer to perfect mitzvah observance. Yet, Rashi (quoting the Torat Kohanim 26:2) says that this refers to עמלות בתורה, lit. toiling in Torah.

Further on, G-d warns us: “But if you will not listen to Me and will not perform all of these commandments…If you consider My decrees loathsome…” (Ibid. 14-15). What follows in the parsha are seven distinct punishments and thirty one verses of admonition – almost triple the amount of verses dedicated to the blessings listed previously. Why is the punishment so extreme?

Surely such a punishment is caused by a severely wicked path. Yet we find in Rashi (again quoting the Torat Kohanim): “If you will not listen to me: to be toiling in Torah.” Simply astounding! This exhaustive list of devastating and destructive consequences is due to a lack of עמלות בתורה? It would be understandable to say that this would stem from a complete breakdown in Torah observance, or a scorning of G-d, blaspheming His name. Yet we see that mere “lack of toil” is enough of a reason to bring down intense punishment upon the people? Why?

The truth is that עמלות – the effort expended in learning Torah – and not the action itself, serves as the real litmus test of attitude, of how much one values and respects Torah and mitzvot in general. And while the end-products of actual limud and observance are important, the effort applied towards them is a more accurate display of one's love and care for the entirety of the Torah; a reflection of our connection to Torah. This is our approach to Limmud HaTorah: the entire focus on the study of Torah is not result-oriented, rather it is process-oriented. This, says the Bach (Orach Chaim 47:4:1) is the reason why it is the Ashkenazic custom to say in the Birchat HaTorah: “לעסוק בדברי תורה” i.e. the business, the labor and effort of Torah study.

There are many brilliant minds, capable of studying any given sugya or topic for a short time, and are able to process the information quickly. They are even able to formulate complex ideas and theories within seconds. Yet, this ability bespeaks nothing of this person’s love of Torah, or their dedication to its ideas and message. For them, it's a passing activity. Today it's Torah, but tomorrow it could be some other topic, to this person it's just a mental exercise.

But the study of Torah is not a mental exercise, or a brain-teaser, where the goal is: how quickly and easily can you do it? It is the act of fashioning our ideas and intellect, and bringing them closer to the Mind of the Divine. Only through the prodigious effort expended in study can one rise to this level.

I once heard my Rosh Yeshiva Rav Ahron Lopiansky Shlit”a bemoan how, while Chacham Ovadia Yosef זצ״ל was world-renowned for his amazing and awe-inspiring photographic memory, too often what was glossed over was his amazing התמדה – diligence in learning. For while it was impressive he could recall so much from books and sources, people seem to forget that in order for him to recall those sources, it meant he had to dedicate hours and hours to sitting and learning them! The building-up of that massive storage of information did not come without intense dedication to their study.

It is related that people used to remark how the Rogatchover Gaon, Rav Yosef Rosen, was a world-class genius with phenomenal memory, who knew the entire Shas backwards and forwards. The Meshech Chochma, Rav Meir Simcha M’Dvinsk, upon hearing this would say: “It's not that he [the Rogatchover] has a photographic memory, it's just that when you ask him a question anywhere in Shas, because he is constantly reviewing Shas, he just recently saw the Gemara!”

The process – the effort, toil and dedication – is what matters, not the finished product. The non-toiling, while it may seem innocuous, just simply lacking effort, is in truth a reflection of our appreciation (or lack-thereof) for Torah and mitzvot in general.

This is why the verse that follows: “But if you will not listen to Me” (because we are not toiling in Torah) is “If you find my decrees loathsome – ואם בחוקותי תמאסו”. What is loathsome? Rashi tells us this refers to others who keep the Mitzvot. One who does not toil will bring about a chain-reaction that will inevitably result in him looking with disgust upon those who do commit themselves to the Torah. Why is this so? If I personally do not toil in Torah, I will loath and despise others who do??

Yes – because in truth, the lack of עמילות is a reflection of my deeper attitude. If I do not think that Torah is valuable and worthy of my effort, I will not respect those who recognize its true value. And I will need to justify my own approach by disregarding their behavior as loathsome and unacceptable.

How powerful is the toil of Torah! May we all be זוכה to learn Torah with effort and diligence, and to have this attitude pervade our observance of Mitzvot every day.

Shabbat Shalom

Parshat Emor - All in the Family

“You shall dwell in Sukkot for a seven day period; כל אזרח בישראל - every citizen in Israel shall sit in Sukkot” (Vayikra 23:42). The question is asked: seemingly בישראל is superfluous; what is it meant to include? Rashi says this is coming to include converts.

Rav Yaakov Kaminetzky זצ״ל asks: why is there a need for a limmud to tell us that a convert is included? Are converts not just like any other Jew? The need for a special limmud gives the impression that, if not for the drasha, a convert would not be obligated in the mitzvah of Sukka! Why would this be so?

Rav Yaakov explains, the reason can be found in the very next verse: “So that your generations will know that I caused the Children of Israel to dwell in Sukkot when I took them from the land of Israel.” (ibid. 43). The Sukka would stand as a reminder that G-d protected our ancestors in the Wilderness. If so, one might have thought that this applied only to those who were actually in the wilderness; but a convert, whose ancestors were not in the Midbar, may not be obligated. Thus, the need for a special drasha: even converts are included in the obligation, for they are equal to the rest of the nation.

In light of this, we can ask another question. We find in the Mishna in Bikkurim (1:4) that when the farmer brings his first fruits, he must read from the “Parshat Habikkurim.” In that parsha, the farmer gives thanks to G-d for the fruit of the Land that “He [G-d] swore to our ancestors to give us.” The Mishna disqualifies a convert from this reading. Because in fact, the convert’s ancestors were not promised the land.* Why is there no drasha here to include a Ger in the mitzvah of Kriat Parshat Habikkurim? Should this not be similar to the mitzvah of Sukka, where despite the lack of the converts’ ancestors’ presence in the midbar, they are nonetheless included? Both mitzvot are seemingly stating a fact i.e. “my ancestors were present at the time of the mitzvah,” thus excluding a convert from claiming the same thing. If so, what is distinct about the mitzvah of Sukka, that the Torah goes out of its way to include converts as well?

Perhaps the distinction lies in the ultimate message of Sukkot. The miracle of Sukkot in the desert was that G-d protected the Jewish people from all outside forces; as the prophet says the Sukkot would serve “as a shade from heat in the daytime, as a protection and refuge from storm and from rain” (Yishaya 4:6). The Jews, dwelling in utter isolation, were shielded by G-d Himself from the harsh weather and elements. But this protection was not a one-time occurrence. Rather, this care and love that He bestowed upon us exists for all times and generations. “So that your generations will know…” – what Hahem did then, and what He will continue to do for us! By remembering the miracle He did then, we can know that we can rely on His protection always.

We see a difference in the statement made by Sukkot versus that of Bikkurim. With Bikkurim, the farmer is stating a historical fact - the focus is on what actually happened. It would be incorrect for a convert to make a statement such as this, which is false. Hashem did not promise the land to his ancestors. However, by the mitzvah of Sukkot, we see from the pasuk that the emphasis is not on what happened, but on the implications it has for our emunah in Hashem’s care for us. The message of G-d’s divine protection is something that is not only timeless, but universal as well; a love that crosses all genealogies and backgrounds. Of this love, a convert is surely part of the “family.”

There are many things which can “shake” our emunah and make us feel like we are not experiencing, or not worthy of G-d’s care. It is at those times which we can find strength in connecting to the past – our own, and that of our collective history – to recall when we have seen G-d’s personal care for us. Every person in the nation, no matter his background, needs to ingrain this message in himself so that he will never lose hope or faith.

*The Yerushalmi (ibid.) disagrees with this Mishna and cites the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda that any Ger can recite the Bikkurim text, as Avraham Avinu was “the father of all the nation (Bereishit 17:5), and hence as the father of all future Geirim. Thus every Ger is included within that original oath to Avraham. The Rambam (Bikkurim 4:3) rules like the Yerushalmi.

Shabbat Shalom

Parshat Acharei Mot - Kedoshim: Not A Chance

This week's parsha begins: “Hashem spoke to Moshe after the death of Aharon's two sons, when they approached before Hashem, and they died” (Vayikra 16:1). In Aharon's merit for accepting the decree without question, G-d introduces the service in the Mishkan on Yom Kippur. “בזאת יבא אהרן” –  “With this shall Aharon enter [the holy of holies]” (ibid. 3).

Among the intricate and lengthy details of the Yom Kippur service that the Kohen Gadol must perform, there is a compelling and mysterious aspect: the שעיר המשתלח. The Kohen would set aside two he-goats, one on his left side and the other on his right. The Kohen would then stick both hands into a box and draw lots, one in each hand. On one lot was written “לה׳”. It would be attached to one of the goats (the goat on the same side as the hand that drew this lot), and the goat would be brought as a קרבן חטאת. The other lot read ״לעזאזל״ and was put on the other goat, which would be brought outside the city and pushed off a high cliff.

What is the significance of these lots? Seemingly it would be enough to set aside each one for a purpose, as with any other korban, i.e. one would be designated as a חטאת, and the other goat would be, by default, sent to Azazel. What is the purpose of labeling each goat separately, and specifically through the process of a lottery?

There is a fascinating Gemara in Sanhedrin (43b). After the miraculous destruction of Jericho, G-d placed a complete חרם (ban) on the spoils of war. In the next attempt at conquest, Yehoshua and the nation wage war against the people of Ai, but are soundly beat back, losing thirty-six men in the battle. Yehoshua is at a complete loss to why this tragedy befell the Nation. G-d comes to Yehoshua and tells him that someone in the camp has broken the חרם. Yehoshua asks G-d: “Who is it?” G-d responds “וכי דילטור אני (Am I a gossiper)?! Go, and make a גורל (a lottery).” Yehoshua draw the lot, and it falls on Achan. Confronted with the results, Achan responds: “How can you find me guilty through lots? If I were to put you [Yehoshua] and Elazar Hakohen, two of the greatest of the generation, surely the lots would fall upon one of you as well!” Deeply bothered by this, Yehoshua responds: “Do not cast aspersions upon the lots, through which the land of Israel is destined to be apportioned!” Achan finally relents and admits his sin.

What was Achan’s argument here? And what upset Yehoshua so much?

Achan’s defense was this: “If I were to put you [Yehoshua] and Elazar Hakohen surely it would fall on one of you.” The Maharsha (ibid.) explains that Achan was claiming that there is no Providential authority to the lots; rather they are subject to “chance” – a מקרה בעלמא – just a random statistical occurrence! For even if he were to put two of the most saintly people, leaders of the generation, one of them would be found “guilty”. If they were the only options, then of course, statistically it would have to fall on at least one of them. According to Achan’s reasoning, surely the lots are not a proof that he committed any wrongdoing.

Achan was attacking a basic premise in Judaism: G-d’s intimate and personal relationship with the Jewish people. Our nation exists on a wholly different plane than the rest of the of world. אין מזל לישראל, the Gemara says (Shabbat 156b). We are not governed by “chance” or statistics, rather we are tended with love, guided and cared for directly by the One Above. (While the nature of השגחה פרטית is subject to dispute, this is only regarding the individual, but in reference to the Nation as a whole there is almost a unanimous agreement among the Mefarshim that G-d is personally involved in the collective fate of the Jewish People*.) To claim or suggest that something is just by chance or happenstance, removes the unique connection that G-d has bestowed upon the Jewish people, having set us aside from among the nations of the world. Yehoshua was deeply angered at this wanton disrespect for the lottery; he understood that nothing is by chance, and nothing that happens in this world is without G-d’s personal knowledge and direction.

This is why lots are so integral to the service of Yom Kippur. They stand as symbols to the Jewish people that they are in the Hands of G-d, just as our fate and forgiveness on this holy day is decided by G-d alone. Not by chance or statistics, but rather a clear and guiding Master, and unto Him do we pray for our personal and national salvation. These lots would serve as the reminder that we are not cast into this world without Divine direction or care, and that no matter what the statistics say, there is always a chance that Hashem will do differently.

I once heard a remarkable story: A father of three was unfortunately stricken with a rare disease, an illness that carried with it a low percentage of survival. The family, obviously devastated to receive such news, met with their doctor to discuss a plan of action. The doctor, a non-Jew, led the family through what felt like a dizzying maze of options of experimental medications, risky surgeries and consultations with other doctors–experts in the field. Just as the family was about to leave, the doctor stopped the family: “One last thing I must tell you...you are Orthodox Jews, and you have a very powerful tool; you have prayer. I can't tell you how many times I've seen Jews beat the odds. It's like you people are not subject to percentages! Being an atheist, as hard as it is to admit, I've seen it too many times to ignore. Please don't forget to pray.” The family, strengthened with this “medical advice,” stormed the Heavens with their prayers. Baruch Hashem, their father went on to live for many years in full health, “beating the odds.”

This doctor had a front-row seat to this special nature of Klal Yisrael. No force or כח (power) other than G-d Himself controls our fate, and surely not statistics – a complete absence of power. This is a message we can learn from the גורלות of the Yom Kippur service, which we can carry through all year long.

Shabbat Shalom

*Regarding Achan's guilt, proven by the lotteries: why is this not considered purely a personal השגחה פרטית question, which is subject to dispute as previously mentioned. The answer to this is as follows: the lots were cast in order to discern the reason for why Klal Yisrael lost to Ai, which is ultimately a collective issue. The entire context and purpose of this story in the Gemara in Sanhedrin is that the punishment for Achan’s sin was a carrying-out of collective punishment after crossing the Jordan, the time at which Klal Yisrael became subject to “כל ישראל ערבים זה בזה” – collective responsibility.

Parshat Tazria-Metzora: A Life Apart

This week’s parsha tells us of the Metzora – someone afflicted with Tzaraat – who must be put חוץ למחנה ישראל, sequestered from the Jews’ encampment.

Why is utter isolation the appropriate punishment for the Metzora?

The Gemara in Arachin (15b) gives in an interesting explanation:

"אמר ריש לקיש מאי דכתיב {ויקרא יד-ב} זאת תהיה תורת המצורע זאת תהיה תורתו של מוציא שם רע"
“Reish Lakish said: What is stated ‘This shall be the law of the Metzora’ (Vayikra 14:2) – This shall be the law of one who slanders”

This affliction comes upon one who has actively slandered others. Thus, it seems befitting that the punishment for this person is alienation. By slandering others, he is misusing the gift of speech – a potential means of connection to others and building of society – in order to wreak havoc and bring destruction to humanity. Such a person shows that he is not fit to live among the rest of the people.

Unfortunately, we see too often that slander is used to “get ahead” in the workplace and in life. Man will “play” one person against another in an attempt to curry favor with both, thinking this will make him successful. But the Torah tells us that this behavior will ultimately lead to his downfall. The message here is clear: in the end, it is the slanderer who will become isolated and alone.

Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz זצ״ל explains why Chazal (Nedarim 64b) includes the Metzora among the four who are considered dead even in life: 1. The Poor man; 2. The Childless; 3. The Blind Man; and 4. The Metzora. Each one of these categories of people are in some way or another excluded from “society.” The poor man cannot afford his basic necessities as others can, the barren are excluded from family activities, and the blind man cannot sense what others sense. In these ways each one is “removed” from the general public. The Metzora too, due to his own infractions, cannot partake of civil society. He is considered “dead”, not privy to live life (חיים) among others.

I once heard from Rav Yecheskel Weinfeld שליט״א an interesting idea. The word for life – חיים – is plural. This signifies to us that true life is not one of isolation. Rather it is to be shared with others. This dovetails beautifully with the message of the Metzora. He who is actively engaged in antisocial behaviors, using his speech to undercut and hurt others, is to be expelled from civilization – from “life.”

Both the Kli Yakar and Rav Hirsch tell us that, in his isolation, the Metzora is now forced to reflect on his deficiencies and repent, so that he can once more become worthy of being a part of this nation.

But while we antagonize the actions of the Metzora, the Torah does not allow us to forget his plight. The Gemara in Moed Katan (5a) quotes the verse “He [the Metzora] is to call out “Contaminated, Contaminated!” (ibid. 13:45). The Gemara explains that this proclamation is to serve the double purpose of warning others of his affliction, so that they will not come to contamination, and also to: “inform the public of his anguish, so that they may pray for him.”

This Gemara has always fascinated me. The Metzora has done irrevocable damage to people’s lives, families and the general good of the community, to the extent that we disallow him any association with others. Seemingly, if there is a poster-child for a cancer on society, this person is it! When banishing him, shouldn’t we be saying: “Good riddance!”? Yet we see the complete opposite response is expected. The Torah demands of us to pray for him, that he should fix his ways and learn his lesson. I believe this is because while we banish the Metzora for his crimes against humanity, through that process we cannot lose our humanity; we must still be able to empathize and care for everyone.

Speech is an amazing thing. It has no physical characteristics (דבר שאין בו ממש), yet we see that it has the power to build and destroy, alienate and connect. We would be wise to be careful in our everyday activities to use speech not to put-down and belittle, but rather as a tool to create and empower.

Shabbat Shalom