From: Netvort@aol.com
Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 2:26 AM
To: JoshHoff@aol.com
Subject: Netvort : parshas Chukas-Balak, 5766






                                                 View from the Top

                   By Rabbi Joshua (progressively known as The Hoffer) Hoffman


  Parshas Chukas records the death of Aharon, the Kohen Gadol, on Mount Hor (Hor HaHor), which was on the boundary of the land of Edom. The Torah describes his death in brief, and the midrash fills in some details. God tells Moshe, "divest Aharon of his garments and dress Elazar his son in them ; Aharon shall be brought in and die there" (Bamidbar 20:26). The Yalkut Shimoni cites a midrash which says that as Moshe removed each item of the garments of the kohen gadol from Aharon, he clothed Elazar in it. This process, says the midrash, of necessity required miracles in order to take place, because the upper garments remained as upper garments, and the lower garments remained as lower garments. What was the purpose of having the process done in this way ? Rabbi Avrohom Shmuel Binyomin Sofer, author of the commentary Kesav Sofer, explains that there was a need to impress upon Elazar that he was not on the same level as his father, and it was only through a miraculous process done in his father's merit that he was being allowed to replace him in his position. Rabbi Sofer goes on to say that this midrashic note is hinted to in the name of the place where Aharon died, Hor HaHor, which literally means the mountain of the mountain. Rashi explains that the mountain consisted of a small mountain sitting on top of a larger mountain. The larger mountain, says the Ksav Sofer, represented Aharon, and the smaller mountain represented Elazar. I would like to suggest a somewhat different explanation of the name Hor HaHor, based on Rabbi Sofer's comment, but developing it a bit differently.


  The Torah tells us, as we have seen, that Aharon died on the border of the land of Edom. Although the Torah says explicitly that Aharon would not enter Eretz Yisroel because of the sin at Mei Merivah when Moshe struck the rock, still, Rashi says that the reason he died at the border of Edom was because the nation had wished to join in a close relationship with Eisav. This is a reference to the request that the nation had made of Edom to let them pass through his land on the way to Eretz Yisroel. Actually, it is a bit difficult to understand why this action was considered reprehensible. Doesn't the Torah command us to send peace proposals to the nations we are about to wage war against in capturing Eretz Yisroel? Moreover, didn't Moshe send peace proposals to Sichon in order to pass through his land, even though it was not prescribed by the Torah? What was wrong with making an attempt to pass through Edom's land in a friendly manner ? Rabbi Shmuel Bornstein, in his Shem MiShmuel, explains that even though it was appropriate to seek safe passage through the land of Edom, there was still a need to maintain national dignity in the midst of that effort. Thus, it was wrong to say to Edom, in requesting passage through their land, "Thus says your brother Yisroel" (Bamidbar 20:13). While it is true that Ya'akov and Eisav were brothers, that was only in a biological sense. The name Yisroel, however, refers to the spiritual aspect of the nation, and there is no brotherhood with Eisav in that area. Because the nation did not exercise the proper restraint in its peace proposal, it suffered through losing Aharon a bit earlier than they otherwise would have lost him.


  Perhaps we can add to Rabbi Bornstein's explanation that it was precisely because Aharon personified the trait of peace, and always sought to bring peace among people, that he died when the nation made the mistake it did in its message to Edom. By extending the notion of brotherhood with Eisav to spiritual matters, the nation was distorting the notion of the pursuit of peace that Aharon sought to teach them. Moreover, perhaps Aharon himself was partially to blame for this distortion in the sense that he did not properly inculcate this distinction into the nation's consciousness, and, therefore, he died at the time and place he did, so that, by his death, he would teach them that distinction.


  Based on Rabbi Bornstein's explanation, and our expansion of it, we can propose another explanation of the imagery of Hor HaHor, a small mountain atop a large mountain, as being the place of Aharon's death. There is a well known aphorism that a midget standing on the shoulders of a giant can see farther than the giant himself can see. This aphorism is generally assumed to have its origins in non-Jewish sources going back to antiquity, but was used often by famous rabbinic figures, as early as the thirteenth century (the interested reader is referred to the article, "Dwarfs on the Shoulders of Giants," by Dr. Shnayer Z. Leiman, in Tradition, 1993, pages 90-94, and, at greater length, to Robert K. Merton’s work, On the Shoulders of Giants : A Shandean Postscript, mentioned in Dr. Leiman’s article, note 10.). The first Torah authority (and Jew) to cite this aphorism was the great Italian rabbinic scholar, Rabbi Isaac of Trani (circa 1200-1260), known as the Tosafos Rid. In his volume of responsa, he used this aphorism to explain why he felt justified in taking issue, in his writings, with an earlier, greater rabbi. True, he said, that rabbi was much greater than him, but it was only because of what he learned from his teachings that he was able to find further insights and take issue with what he had written. The Tosafos Rid then mentions the image of the giant standing on top of the giant, which he says, he heard from some non-Jewish philosophers. If the midget stands next to the giant, they said, the giant can see much farther than the midget. However, if the midget stands on the shoulders of the giant, then the midget can see even farther than the giant. In the same way, said the Tosafos Rid, without the teachings of the earlier rabbis, we are intellectual midgets. However, after learning their teachings and struggling to understand them properly, we can attain greater clarity of perception than they did. 

  My teacher, Rav Aharon Soloveichik, zt"l, from whom I first heard the above quotation of the Tosafos Rid, applied the aphorism to our custom of including the sins of our fathers in the text of the vidui, or confession,  that we say in the selichos, or prayers of supplication, on fast days, and especially during the month of Tishrei. Even though the mitzvoh of respecting one’s father applies even after his death, we need to recognize the mistakes our fathers made. If we consider ourselves as standing on their shoulders, this recognition will not lead to a diminution of respect for them, but rather, generate even greater respect. Perhaps, then, we can expand on the Kesav Sofer’s explanation of the imagery of Hor HaHor as symbolizing Elazar sitting atop his father Aharon. According to his explanation, the message of this imagery is that it was only through a miracle that Elazar, the smaller figure, was able to step into the shoes of his father, the larger image. Using the aphorism of the midget standing on the shoulders of the giant, however, perhaps we can say that  this imagery delivered a different message to Elazar. This message was that even though he was small in comparison to his father, by standing on his father’s shoulders and learning the importance of seeking peace, he could use his higher vantage point to attain a new perspective. This new perspective would then enable him to correct the mistake that his father had made in his method of teaching the importance of peace seeking, which led to the nation’s perception that seeking peace entails compromising their sense of national spiritual dignity.



  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.