Chukas

5782

Celebrating and Embracing Mystery

The Parshah begins with the Parah Adumah and says זאת חקת התורה. Rashi says לפי שהשטן ואומות העולם מונין את ישראל לומר מה המצוה הזאת ומה טעם יש בה לפיכך כתב בה חקה גזירה היא מלפני ואין לך רשות להרהר אחריה. Although the way the אפר of the Parah Adumah functions is a חוק, we nevertheless could and should ask why it takes a חוק to remove טומאת מת.

An explanation could be as follows. In general why is a מת מטמא? What is negative about the מת? It could be that when a person is exposed to death, it brings down his spirit, it brings him to a point of despair and יאוש. This is because when standing face to face with the unknown, a person feels out of control and it could be something debilitating and paralyzing. The encounter takes life out of his own life. The exposure to the finite nature of human existence brings a person down and that’s why is spirit is defiled.

Therefore, we take the חוק of Parah Adumah to remove טומאת מת which is the idea is that we shouldn’t passively take it in rather we should actively engage the unknown and make it part of our spiritual experience. We take the unknown and uncertainty and we ritualize it with the Parah Adumah which is beyond human understanding. We don’t allow the unknown to paralyze us rather the unknown is transformed into a mystery which enhances our Avodas Hashem.

Risk of Yerushah

By the death of Aharon HaKohen, the Pasuk says ויבכו את אהרן שלשים יום כל בית ישראל (כ,כט). Rashi says that it was specifically at the death of Aharon HaKohens that the Pasuk says כל בית ישראל, as opposed to by Moshe Rabbeinu, to express the fact that both אנשים והנשים cried and the reason is שהיה אהרן רודף שלום ומטיל אהבה בין בעלי מריבה ובין איש לאשתו.

In a letter that was written by a Reb Mordechai Yosef of Lublin, who later emigrated to Yerushalayim, he writes that he heard the following from The Sanzer Rav, the Divrei Chaim. A reason as to why everyone cried by the death of Aharon HaKohen as opposed to Moshe Rabbeinu was because people understood that as great as Moshe Rabbeinu was, there will be in every generation some יחידי סגולה, some individuals who will rise to a high level in Torah. Since Moshe Rabbeinu functioned as the מוסר התורה, Yidden knew that there will be some individuals who will rise to the level of being the מוסר התורה, to be worthy of that position. However, the Kehunah is by ירושה so they cried because they worried who will be the successors in the future generations of Aharon HaKohen, who might not be worthy of such a position. We see this was a real concern as the Gemara in Yoma discusses that during the second Beis HaMikdash, there were Kohanim Gedolim who bought it for money. Therefore there was more crying by the death of Aharon as opposed to Moshe. (It would seem that the Rebbe was alluding to the Minhag of succession in Rebbisha families that was becoming common in his time.)

Importance of Intention and Action

There is a very strange occurrence of Aggadah type of Gemara that appears in the Mishnayos in Rosh Hashanah. Usually, Aggadah is found within the Gemara and rarely in the Mishnayos. However, in the third Perek of Rosh Hashanah 3:6, the Mishnayos say as follows:

מי שהיה עובר אחורי בית הכנסת או שהיה ביתו סמוך לבית הכנסת ושמע קול שופר או קול מגילה, אם כוון לבו - יצא, ואם לאו - לא יצא. אף על פי שזה שמע וזה שמע, זה כוון לבו וזה לא כוון לבו. והיה כאשר ירים משה ידו וגבר ישראל וגו', וכי ידיו של משה עושות מלחמה או שוברות מלחמה? אלא לומר לך: כל זמן שהיו ישראל מסתכלין כלפי מעלה, ומשעבדין את לבם לאביהם שבשמים - היו מתגברים, ואם לאו - היו נופלים. כיוצא בדבר אתה אומר עשה לך שרף ושים אתו על נס והיה כל הנשוך וראה אתו וחי, וכי נחש ממית או נחש מחיה? אלא בזמן שישראל מסתכלין כלפי מעלה ומשעבדין את לבם לאביהם שבשמים - היו מתרפאין, ואם לאו היו נימוקים. חרש שוטה וקטן אין מוציאין את הרבים ידי חובתן. זה הכלל: כל שאינו מחוייב בדבר - אינו מוציא את הרבים ידי חובתן

The obvious question is why the מסדרי המשניות inserted these seemingly irrelevant stories, of Moshe Rabbeinu with his hands up during the battle with Amalek and Moshe Rabbeinu carrying around the נחש הנחושת, in the context of the Halachos of תקיעת שופר, specifically the Halachah that one needs to be כוון לבו and the Halachah חרש שוטה וקטן אין מוציאין את הרבים ידי חובתן. Furthermore, the Rambam writes in Peirush Hamishnayosכל זה ברור לפי מה שצריך כאן בענין שאנחנו בו ולפי מטרת הספר. It would seem that the Rambam is addressing this problem but just says that this is exactly what needs to be said here. What is the explanation for this?

An explanation could be based on what Chazal say in Vayikra Rabbah 29:3 on the Pasuk in Tehillim 47:6עלה אלהים בתרועה ה' בקול שופר that through the קול שופר, it’s as if הקב"ה is עומד מכסא הדין ויושב בכסא רחמים. So there is room for concern that people will attribute some magical כוחות to the Shofer on its own, that it’s some sort of a סגולה to be מערבב the שטן and be ממתיק הדין. But the truth and reality is that the Shofer doesn’t have any magical mechanism to activate spiritual כוחות. The Medrash in Vayikra Rabbah 29:6 says the following: בשופר בחדש הזה שפרו מעשיכם אמר להן הקדוש ברוך הוא לישראל אם שפרתם מעשיכם הריני נעשה לכם כשופר הזה מה שופר זה מכניס בזו ומוציא בזו כך אני עומד מכסא הדין ויושב על כסא רחמים והופך לכם מדת הדין למדת רחמים אימתי בחדש השביעי

So it’s clear that it’s not the שופר which is מהפך מדת הדין למדת רחמים rather it’s the שיפור of the מעשי האדם which brings about the change. The Shofer on its own doesn’t do anything.

That is what the Mishna in Rosh Hashanah is saying אף על פי שזה שמע וזה שמע, זה כוון לבו וזה לא כוון לבו because it is only through the כוונה that the Mitzvah is fulfilled and the Shofer accomplishes. Even though inside the בית הכנסת everything is being done according to Halacha and this person who is מאחורי בית הכנסת is listening to those same קולות that everyone in the בית הכנסת is listening to, nevertheless he has no תועלת from this Shofar if he isn’t מכוון לבו. Meaning, the תועלת of the Shofar is only through שיפור of his own מעשים. This is why the Mishnah also concludes חרש שוטה וקטן אין מוציאין את הרבים ידי חובתן to teach us that only the חיוב and the חובה is what gives meaning to the Shofar. The קול שופר doesn’t have any intrinsic value rather it’s only the Mitzvah which gives it meaning.

Therefore, it’s in this context between these two Halachos that the Mishnah bring the story of ידיו של משה and the נחש הנחושת and the Rambam writes in Peirush Hamishnayosכל זה ברור לפי מה שצריך כאן בענין שאנחנו בו ולפי מטרת הספר because they both highlight the idea that there is nothing inherently special and unique to the hands of Moshe and the נחש הנחושת ratherבזמן שישראל מסתכלין כלפי מעלה ומשעבדין את לבם לאביהם שבשמים היו מתרפאין and if they aren’t מכוון and משעבד את לבם לאביהם שבשמים, then they will be unsuccessful. The reason being because it’s all about the כוונה.

However, as important as כוונה is, it nevertheless remains secondary to the action as there is even an opinion that holds מצוות אין צריכות כוונה. This idea that כוונה is secondary to ones actions can be seen in the Parshah. The end of the Parshah discusses the battle with עוג and Hashem says to Moshe אל תירא אתו כי בידך נתתי אתו and Rashi says שהיה משה ירא להלחם, שמא תעמוד לו זכותו של אברהם, שנאמר (בראשית יד, יג) ויבא הפליט, הוא עוג, שפלט מן הרפאים וכו'. Moshe Rabbeinu was worried that עוג had the זכותו של אברהם because he informed Avraham of regarding לוט which led to him being saved. Although the action of עוג was noble, his intentions were not as Rashi writes in Lech Lecha 14:13 that he was מתכוין שיהרג אברהם וישא את שרה. But even though he had bad intentions, Moshe Rabbeinu was still afraid of the Zchus that he had because of his actions. From here we see the idea of מצוות אין צריכות כוונה which highlights the point that really what’s important is actions and the כוונה, a person’s thoughts and motivations, are really secondary. This is the idea behind what the Sefer HaChinuch writes in Mitzvah 16 אדם נפעל כפי פעולותיו ולבו וכל מחשבותיו תמיד אחר מעשיו שהוא עושה בהם וכו' כי אחרי הפעולות נמשכים הלבבות וכו'.

This idea can also be seen from the Gemara in Bava Metziah 61b where the Gemara says לא תגנב על מנת למיקט, לא תגנב על מנת לשלם תשלומי כפל. Rashi writes the reason why a person would be גנב על מנת לשלם תשלומי כפל would be שרוצה לההנותו, ויודע בו שלא יקבל. He knows that this poor person won’t take the money so he comes up with a plan to steal and to get caught and this way he could give the person extra money, by paying the כפל. Although this person has all the right intentions, he nevertheless transgresses the לאו of לא תגנובו. The Rambam in Hilchos Geneiva 1:2 writes the reason is because שלא ירגיל עצמו בכך. The idea is that actions are really what is most important and therefore a person must condition himself to do good which will have a positive impact on his character.

First Enemies and then Friends

When Reb Yaakov Kaminetzky was already in his upper eighties, he told the Rav the following. He said that he brought Reb Aharon Kotler to Slabodka Yeshiva and although he was one year younger than him, Reb Aharon managed to become much greater than him. For this, he offered the following explanation.

The Pasuk in the Parshah says על כן יאמר בספר מלחמת ה' את והב בסופה (כא,יד) and the Gemara Kidushin 30b says about this Pasuk אפי' האב ובנו הרב ותלמידו שעוסקין בתורה בשער אחד נעשים אויבים זה את זה ואינם זזים משם עד שנעשים אוהבים זה את זה שנאמר את והב בסופה אל תקרי בסופה אלא בסופה. It would seem that learning begins with אויבים זה את זה and then reaches a point of אוהבים זה את זה. So Reb Yaakov said that Reb Aharon was very challenging and fire when it came to learning and if he disagreed with the person, he would call him names and attack him viciously. But Reb Yaakov said about himself that he was אַ ליבעראַל מענטש, he was open to others and although he said one way, he could accept that another would have a different opinion. But it would seem the the way to greatness in Torah is that it first must be נעשים אויבים זה את זה, which he didn’t have, and then it could be אוהבים זה את זה.

5779

Haftorah

This week’s Haftorah discusses יפתח who went to war with בני עמון. The Gemara in ראש השנה דף כה ע"ב says יפתח בדורו כשמואל בדורו. The simple understanding of this Gemara is that in spite of the fact that יפתח was not a prophet and was just a warrior (ילקוט שמעוני ספר שופטים סז goes as far as to say he was not even a בן תורה), nonetheless for his generation he was as good as Shmuel. But if this was the understanding, why would the Gemara say כשמואל בדורו, if Shmuel was a great man for every generation? It should have just said כשמואל because Shmuel doesn’t need to be qualified by דורו like יפתח needed to be qualified, because Shmuel is great for every generation?

We see from here that it is not so. Rather, just like a smaller leader is what a lesser generation needs, so too the greater leader is only good for the greater generation. If Shmuel would be in the דור of יפתח, he wouldn’t be effective or able to lead. Every generation needs a leader that is befitting of that generation’s needs and level. As the פרקי דרבי אליעזר says in פרק ו regarding the dispute between the sun and the moon at creation and the subsequent actions by Hashem, מה עשה הקדוש ברוך הוא, הגדיל את האחד והקטין את האחד. We see from here that just like Hashem punished the moon by making it small, he also punished the sun by making it big because big is not always good.

The Pasuk says ויקח משה את המטה מלפני ה כאשר צוהו (כ,ט). The חזקוני says, based on a דיוק from the words מלפני ה', that Moshe did not take his own מטה rather he took the מטה אהרן. Moshe’s staff was always with him and was not מלפני ה'. However, מלפני ה' has to be referring to the staff in Parshas Korach where all the נשאים had their מטה placed in the משכן and מטה אהרן was the chosen one as it sprouted flowers. Then the Pasuk says ויאמר ה' אל משה השב את מטה אהרן לפני העדות למשמרת. So we see that it was מטה אהרן that was מלפני ה' and it was that מטה that משה was told to take. Why was it necessary for Moshe to use the מטה אהרן as opposed to his own?

The answer could be because there is a fundamental difference between the מטה משה and the מטה אהרן. Moshe’s מטה was a מטה of action and hitting as it was used to hit the יאור. As opposed to the מטה אהרן which was a מטה of beauty (as it sprouted שקדים and flowers) and was a softer מטה. When using the מטה of Ahron, it’s not a מטה of hitting rather a more gentle מטה, of communication and of אוהב שלום ורודף שלום. Moshe was to understand that by being commanded to take the מטה of Ahron, that this situation (as opposed to in Parshas בשלח) required speaking and not hitting.

The leadership of Moshe with the דור המדבר was a leadership that had to do with coercion and force, as the overbearing presence of Moshe was. However, now with the דור הבאי הארץ, it’s more about communication and giving them more independence and leading with אהרן way. This idea is similar to what was explained in the beginning that every generation has its leader and form of leadership that speaks to the people of that generation. Therefore, as a consequence of the חטא מי מריבה, Moshe didn’t enter EY not only as a punishment, but because that harsh type of leadership was not appropriate for the דור הבאי הארץ.

Emphasis on שאיפות

The מגן אברהם in סימן תקפ quotes from the תניא רבתי that on ערב שבת פרשת חקת, there was a מנהג to fast because on that day twenty wagons filled with the Talmud were burned in France. It was established specifically on ערב שבת פרשת חקת as opposed to the day of the month that it occurred because it became known through a שאלת חלום that the Parshah was connected because the Targum on the Pasuk זאת חקת התורה is דא גזירת אורייתא. On some level perhaps we could understand the connection between the שריפת התלמוד and פרשת חקת.

The רמח"ל באגרות נ says being that everything Hashem does is for the good of the Jews, it must be understood what good there was in times where it became impossible for Jews to learn because of the burning of the Talmud. He goes on to explain that by most עבירות, Hashem is not מצרף מחשבה למעשה. However, when it comes to עבודה זרה, Hashem is מצרף מחשבה למעשה. Therefore, not only is a תיקון for the act of עבודה זרה necessary, but for the thought as well. He explains that the תיקון for such מחשבה is when Jews have a desire and longing to learn and be connected to Hashem, but don’t have the ability because it’s inaccessible. Such a desire and שאיפה is the תיקון for the מחשבה of the עבירה of עבודה זרה. With this it could be understood how the שריפת התלמוד was necessary on some level as a תיקון. The שאיפה and רצון which are present but are not actualized due to inaccessibility is a תיקון for when there is a lacking in שאיפות.

Based on this, we could say that פרה אדומה puts the emphasis on שאיפית and a quest that could never be realized as שלמה המלך says in Koheles אמרתי אחכמה והיא רחוקה ממני. Therefore, זאת חקת התורה which is the Parshah ofפרה אדומה is relevant to the גזירה of the שריפת התלמוד. Because just like the פרה אדומה is about a quest that can never be realized, which is about making a connection with Hashem through a quest and a striving and a desire that can’t be realized, that’s אמרתי אחכמה which is רחוקה ממני. Also the שריפת התלמוד which is the inaccessibility of torah is as if Hashem is saying אמרתי אחכמה but its רחוקה ממני because it’s not accessible. It’s the I want but I can’t.

Rashi quotes Reb Moshe Hadarshan that the פרה אדומה is a תיקון for the חטא העגל. What’s the idea that the פרה אדומה is supposed to wipe away the צואה of the עגל (Based on the משל that Reb Moshe Hadarshan brings)?

The real issue by the חטא העגל was the כי זה משה האיש אשר העלנו מארץ מצרים לא ידענו מה היה לו. This that they said משה האיש was because at this point, the Jewish people lost faith in human leadership and they wanted an angelic leadership. The down side of human leadership is that it’s unreliable, and unknown, as they though he was coming back but he didn’t. Such doubt is very difficult to deal with. But that difficulty is part of our ongoing progression. Being able to deal with uncertainty and doubt is the same idea as אמרתי אחכמה והיא רחוקה ממני. An unrealized goal, like Moshe not coming down from the mountain and the goal not being realized, and yet we keep on striving towards the goal even when it’s not realized. Therefore, פרה אדומה which instills in us the understanding that even if its רחוקה ממנו, we still shouldn’t give up on the אמרתי אחכמה, that’s the תיקון for the חטא העגל where the לא ידענו knocks us out. Now we understand that the לא ידענו should not knock us out, but we should continue trying to know even when we don’t know.

Within Moderation

The Rav said a vort in the name of his father as follows.

We know that Ahron dies in the Parshah, but why did Ahron have to die at the time that he did?

Rashi says on the Pasuk על גבול ארץ אדום (כ,כג) that שמפני שנתחברו כאן להתקרב לעשו הרשע, נפרצו מעשיהם וחסרו הצדיק הזה. What’s the connection? Ahron was the אוהב שלום ורודף שלום אוהב את הבריות ומקרבן לתורה and he brought that מדה into כלל ישראל. However, that מדה, along with all other מידות, has boundaries and needs to be in moderation. When they were getting closed to עשו, they overstepped the boundaries of אוהב את הבריות therefore it was חסרו הצדיק הזה.

שמעו נא המרים

By the hitting of the rock, Moshe says to the people שמעו נא המרים. Rashi explains לשון יוני שוטים, מורים את מוריהם. Why is someone who is מורים את מוריהם called a שוטה?

The Mishna in Avos says איזהו חכם? הלומד מכל אדם. There are different levels of wisdom. A wise person learns from everyone, while a less wise person only learns from his rebbe, and an even less wise person learns from no one and a fool tries to teach his teacher. Not only does he think he doesn’t need to learn from anyone, he thinks he should actually be teaching those who are teaching him. The polar opposite of the חכם is the person that can’t learn even from his rebbe because he thinks he is smarter than everybody. Therefore, the מורים את מוריהם are the ultimate שוטים because they are the total opposite of the חכם, being that they don’t want to learn from anybody, even there rebbe.

Why is it לשון יוני? רבינו יונה on that Mishnah says that חכם is הלומד מכל אדם because the Greeks say that “philo sophy” means a love of חכמה. What defines a חכם is not how much he knows but how much he wants to know. Therefore, he is a חכם even if he doesn’t know that much because he learns from everyone and is always searching for knowledge. That’s why the Greeks call the מורים את מוריהם שוטים because it’s the opposite of חכמה and הלומד מכל אדם.

Videos

Thursday Night Parsha Shiur 5784 - Embracing the Mystery of Life

Thursday Night Parsha Shiur 5782

Shiurim in Los Angeles 5781

Parshas Chukas

Parshas Chukas

Parshas Chukas

Parshas Chukas

Thursday Night Parsha Shiur 5780

Thursday Night Parsha shiur 5780

Ashes and Living Water 5772