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.