Parshat Shemini Shabbat Parah Integrity and Humility the Weekly
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Parshat Shemini Shabbat Parah 23 Adar ll 5779 / March 30, 2019 Daf Yomi: Chulin 123, Nach Yomi: Tehillim 78 Weekly Dvar Torah A project of the NATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAEL SPONSORED BY THE HENRY, BERTHA AND EDWARD ROTHMAN FOUNDATION ROCHESTER, NY,CLEVELAND, OHIO, CIRCLEVILLE, OHIO Integrity and Humility Rabbi Aharon Ziegler Associate Member, Young Israel Council of Rabbis On the eighth day of the Miluim (Inauguration of the Mishkan) Aharon HaKohen burned the meat of the Rosh Chodesh korban chatat, instead of eating it. When Moshe Rabbeinu found out he became upset and demanded an explanation. (The Gemara Zvachim (101b) details the entire incident and dialogue). Aharon explained that he burned the korban because he and his children were onanim (since earlier that day two of Aharon’s children, Nadav and Avihu, died) so they were forbidden to eat the korban. Moshe did not accept this explanation because HaShem had specifically commanded that the korban Mincha of that day be eaten- in spite of Aharon’s state of Anninut. Since Moshe had already conveyed HaShem’s commandment to Aharon to eat the Mincha, he criticized Aharon for treating the Rosh Chodesh chatat differently than the mincha. Aharon replied, that he understood that HaShem’s commandment to eat the Mincha was a Horaat Shaa (a limited one-time leniency), which pertained only to the Kodshei Shaa, (the unique korbanot that were brought especially for the miluim) and not the Rosh Chodesh chatat which is a kodshei dorot (a standard and permanent korban brought regularly. Aharon explained that he deduced the difference from the fact that Moshe had taught him that even maaser sheni, whose laws are less stringent than those of korbanot may not be eaten by an onen. Upon hearing Aharon’s argument, Moshe immediately agreed that Aharon was correct. The Gemara states that Moshe did not attempt to save face by simply saying, “I never heard of that”, but he said , “I did hear of this , but I forgot” This, by itself, shows the greatness of Moshe Rabbeinu. However, the Chatam Sofer, adds a further dimension. Moshe, like Aharon, was never taught that an onen may not eat from a standard korban ledorot. He was expected to infer it from maaser sheni, as Aharon did. His failure to properly use his deductive reasoning was more humiliating to him than simply forgetting a Halacha. Admitting to such a failure could potentially convince people that Moshe’s logic was faulty and lead them to consider his halachic decisions as unreliable. The Gemara is telling us that in spite of this concern, Moshe admitted his shortcomings and did not ascribe his error to forgetfulness. Moshe is not only our “Rabbeinu”, but our role model in leadership, in integrity and in humility. Shabbat Shalom. The Weekly Sidra Rabbi Moshe Greebel Z"L Hyperbole, the art of extravagant exaggeration, is found in many different literary sources, and, is an effective communication tool that is used to catch the attention and to emphasize a contrast. In The Concord Hymn, Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote: .....Here once the embattled farmers stood, and fired the shot heard round the world. While musket shots are not generally loud enough to be heard 'round the world,' the author stressed the historical significance of that opening salvo of the Revolutionary War. In Living To Tell The Tale, Gabriel Garcia Marquez wrote: Well now, one winter it was so cold that all the geese flew backward, and all the fish moved south and even the snow turned blue….. Now, among our Rabbanim of blessed memory, this art of hyperbole also plays an essential role in catching the attention and emphasizing a contrast. Let us begin with a Gemarah in Airuvin 2b, which speaks of a Mavoy, or, the entrance to a blind alley, which is nothing more than an area surrounded by houses, with an opening alley to the public. In order for the occupants of these houses to carry objects on Shabbos within the three sided enclosure, an above cross beam must span the open area. The Gemarah cites a Mishna which speaks of the height of that cross beam: “It was in fact taught, ‘(A cross beam spanning the) entrance (to a blind alley) at a height of more than twenty cubits should be lowered. But, Rabbi Y’huda regards (the entrance) as a proper (gateway even if the beam is) as high as forty or fifty cubits. And, Bar Kapara taught that even a hundred…..’” Quickly interrupting the Mishna, one may very well ask, “Why would anyone in his right mind set a cross beam at the ridiculous height of one hundred cubits?” The Mishna gives us the following answer: “’….. (The high figure) of Bar Kapara might quite well (be regarded as) a hyperbole.’” That is, in order to stress that there is no height limit to the cross beam of a Mavoy, Bar Kapara used hyperbole. Regarding the Tapuach (ash heap- literally [half an apple]) on top of the Mizbai’ach, outer altar), the Gemarah in Chulin 90b has this to say: “We have learned there (Tamid II, 2, 28b) that there was an ash-heap in the middle of the altar, and sometimes there were on it about three hundred Kor (68,100 liters of ashes). Said Rava, ‘It is an exaggeration.’ They gave (the lamb which was to be) the Daily Offering to drink from a cup of gold. Said Rava, ‘It is an exaggeration.’ Rav Ammi said, ‘The Torah, the prophets, and the Sages sometimes spoke in exaggerated terms. The Sages spoke in exaggerated terms as in the cases we have just quoted. The Torah spoke in exaggerated terms as in the verse “The cities are great and fortified up to heaven.” (D’varim 1:28) The prophets spoke in exaggerated terms as in the verse, “So that the earth ripped apart with the sound of them.”’” (M’lachim I 1:40) What has all this business of hyperbole and exaggeration to do with this week’s Sidra? Let us begin with the dietary laws mentioned in Shmini: “What ever goes upon the belly, and whatever goes upon all four, or whatever has a multitude of feet among all creeping things that creep upon the earth, those you shall not eat; for they are an abomination.” (Vayikra 11:42) Concerning this ‘Whatever has a multitude of feet,’ Rashi learns the following: “This is a centipede, an insect with feet from its head to its tail on each side.” In the Gemarah of Chulin 67b, where the centipede is discussed, Rashi states: “We refer to (the centipede) as ‘that of one hundred feet (centipede).’” In truth, centipedes have under 20 to over 300 feet depending on the variety. Hence, for many centipedes, Rashi’s explanation of ‘that of one hundred feet’ is an exaggeration. The text Pardes Yosef brings us an episode in the life of an un-named Admur (Chassidic master) of Lubavitch, concerning the Gemarah in B’choros 57b, which speaks of exaggeration: “Once a certain cedar tree fell in our place and sixteen wagons alongside each other passed its width……” That is, the width of sixteen wagons in a straight line was equal to the width of the fallen cedar, a clear case of hyperbole. We return to the Gemarah: “….. Once the egg of a Bar Yokani (ostrich) fell, and its contents swamped sixteen cities and destroyed three hundred cedar trees…..” Yet another situation of hyperbole. In the Pardes Yosef, a priest asked the above Admur about the purpose of such exaggeration, “Why, posed the priest, did the Rabbis engage in hyperbole?” The Admur responded in the following manner, “When the Tsar’s government decreed that Russian Jews were compelled to live within a designated area, many Jews from other cities and villages lost their entire ability to earn livelihoods from the previous areas they occupied.” “When the Russian Jewish community wrote of this tragedy in their public chronicles,” continued the Admur, “they were unable to state that this loss of livelihood was the direct result of the anti-Semitic Russian government. Instead, they wrote, ‘Due to one drop of ink (the Tsar’s signature), countless cities were lost.’” “That is,” the Admur concluded, “those who lived in the time of this specific evil decree of the Tsar, understood the hyperbole of the one drop of ink. However, those who lived many years after this incident, did not comprehend the hyperbole at all. The same is true with the words of our Rabbanim of blessed memory, who, because of governmental retaliation, were at times, not able to write accurate accounts of history in the Gemarah. Instead, they resorted to hyperbole, which was understood by the generation of that time. In subsequent generations however, this understanding was lost.” While we may wonder why the Torah and our Rabbanim of blessed memory resorted to exaggeration, the answer to this question will regrettably remain unresolved, even if we search for it till China and Africa meet. May we soon see the G’ulah Sh’laimah in its complete resplendence- speedily, and in our times. Good Shabbos. HaShem's Will Rabbi Zvi Walkenfeld Associate Member, Young Israel Council of Rabbis The laws regarding the Parah Adumah (Red Heifer), in this week's special Torah reading, are perplexing and provide an easy target for those who would debate the Torah's truth. All involved in the Parah Adumah’s preparation and application become ritually impure, and those who are ritually impure (from contact with a dead person) become purified through it. There is no similar law in all of Torah.