From: Netvort@aol.com
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 2:30 AM
To: JoshHoff@aol.com
Subject: Netvort : parshas Chukas, 5765




                                                                       
                                                       Try Again

                      By Rabbi Joshua (reversibly known as The Heifer) Hoffman


 In memory of Chaya Rivka bas Yitzchok HaLevi, whose yohrzeit will occur next Friday, the eighth of Tammuz.


 In this week's parsha we are told of the mitzvoh of Parah Adumah, or the Red Heifer, which is used in the process of purifying someone who has become defiled through contact with a human corpse. Many commentators raise the question, why is this mitzvoh mentioned at this point in the Torah. Rashi to parshas Beshalach tells us that the mitzvoh of Parah Adumah was first given at Marah, before the Torah was given at Mt. Sinai. Although this opinion of Rashi is based on an alternate reading of a midrash and is not followed by most commentators, the Talmud in Gittin, 60a, states explicitly that the section of Parah Adumah was one of the eight sections of the Torah that were given on the first of Nissan in the second year after the exodus from Egypt. Moreover, Rashi there writes that the first Parah Adumah was actually burned on the next day, in order to purify the people in preparation for bringing  the Pesach sacrifice. Why, then, is this mitzvoh mentioned in the Torah only now, in parshas Chukas, when the nation is about to enter the Holy Land after a sojourn of forty years in the wilderness? I believe that the key to answering this question lies in a remark cited by Rashi in the name of Rabbi Moshe HaDarshan.


 Rashi tells us that the mitzvoh of Parah Adumah is a classic example of a chok, or a mitzvoh whose purpose is not readily understood, and for which the nations of the world criticize the Jewish people. Still, after explaining the basic meaning of the twenty-two verses in which this mitzvoh is presented, Rashi cites an additional approach to explaining these verses which does shed light on the purpose behind the mitzvah. According to Rabbi Moshe HaDarshan, as cited by Rashi, the red heifer comes to serve as an atonement for the sin of the golden calf. Just as a mother needs to come and clean up the mess that its child makes, so, too, the cow, who is the mother of the calf, needs to clean up the mess that was generated by her offspring. Rav Yerucham Levovitz, who was the great mashgiach ruchani, or spiritual guidance counselor, in the yeshiva of Mir in pre-World War Two Poland, noted, in his commentary Da'as Torah, that the crucial idea mentioned in this explanation of Rabbi Moshe HaDarshan is that the same element that is used for sin can be used to rectify the sin.  Although Rav Yerucham does not say this, I believe that this is a restatement of the element of the Parah Adumah process that is generally considered to be its essential mystery, namely, that it can both purify the impure and defile the pure. I believe that it was this crucial message that was needed to be taught to the generation that was about to enter the land, and that connects the section of Parah Adumah to the sections that follow it in the Torah.


After the section on Parah Adumah, the Torah relates the death of Miriam. Rashi, citing the midrash, writes that this juxtaposition teaches us that just as sacrifices bring atonement, so too does the death of the righteous bring atonement. Although, in last year's Netvort (available at Torahheights.com), we elaborated on this concept and how it relates to the Parah Adumah, I would like to approach it, now, in a different way, in the context of Rabbi Levovitz's explanation of the lesson to be gleaned from the Parah Adumah. The notion that the death of the righteous brings atonement is grounded in the assumption that, when a righteous person dies, we reassess his/her  life, learn from their example and incorporate these lessons into our own lives. In the case of Miriam, we know that during her lifetime, the people did not learn from her example. As Rashi taught us, the meraglim, or spies, should have learned not to engage in leshon hora, or evil talk, from Miriam, who loved Moshe and did not speak in criticism of him out of malice but rather out of concern, but was still punished for what she said. Because they did not learn this lesson, they spoke of the Holy Land in a negative way, led the nation astray, and ultimately caused them to wander in the wilderness for the next thirty-eight years. Now that Miriam died, they had another chance to learn that lesson.


 When Miriam died, the well that had supplied the people with water dried up, and the people complained of their thirst to Moshe. God told Moshe to gather the people in front of a rock and speak to it, which would, in turn, produce water for  them. Why did God tell Moshe to speak to the rock, rather than to hit it, as He had told him to do at Refidim, thirty-eight years earlier, when they complained about a lack of water? Rabbi Moshe Sofer, known as the Chasam Sofer, explains that Moshe was now being given a chance to correct the wrong that the people had done in connection with the evil report of the spies. In that instance, the spies, and with them the nation, sinned through the improper use of speech. Now, Moshe was to demonstrate to them that the same gift of speech could be used in a positive way, to produce the water they needed to slake their thirst. On a wider level, this was actually, the message that the people needed to learn in regard to Eretz Yisroel, in general. As Rabbi Chaim Ya'akov Goldvicht, founding Rosh Yeshivah of the Yeshiva Kerem B'Yavneh, often taught, Eretz Yisroel was the location where the worst possible moral outrages were performed by its local inhabitants, the Cana'anim. It was the mission of the Jewish people to take that same land and use it for the purpose of kedusha, of holiness. In essence, this was the lesson of the Parah Adumah, as explained by Rav Yerucham, and the lesson that Moshe was to have taught the nation by speaking to the rock. Because Moshe, by hitting the rock instead of speaking to it, failed to teach them this lesson, which had such important implications for their future life in Eretz Yisroel, he was not allowed to lead them into the land.  Thus, the placement of the mitzvoh of Parah Adumah at this juncture, on the eve of the nation’s entrance into Eretz Yisroel, though the mitzvoh had actually been given long before, is understandable, because it serves as a framework for understanding the task of the nation once they would enter the land.  



 Please address all correspondence to the author (Rabbi Hoffman) with the following address - JoshHoff @ AOL.com.

 To subscribe to Netvort, send a message with subject line subscribe, to Netvort@aol.com. To unsubscribe, send message with subject line unsubscribe, to the same address.