INTPARSHA -25: Parashat Shemini

From: "Hebraic.Heritage.Newsgroup@sol.wwwnexus.com"
<Hebraic.Heritage.Newsgroup@sol.wwwnexus.com>
To: Parasha-Page List <heb_roots_chr@geocities.com>, Weekly Torah List
<heb_roots_chr@geocities.com>
Subject: INTPARSHA -25: Parashat Shemini
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 16:18:42 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

From: "Yeshivat Har Etzion's Israel Koschitzky Virtual Beit Midrash" <yhe@vbm-torah.org>
To: heb_roots_chr@geocities.com
Subject: INTPARSHA -25: Parashat Shemini

YESHIVAT HAR ETZION
ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)
*********************************************************

INTRODUCTION TO PARASHAT HASHAVUA

by Rav Jonathan Mishkin

PARASHAT SHEMINI

Sound of Silence

Leviticus chapter 10 witnesses the sudden wrath of
God as two of Aaron's sons, Moses' nephews, are struck
down in mid-service.

"Now Aaron's sons Nadab and Abihu each took his fire
pan, put fire in it, which He had not enjoined upon
them. And fire came forth from the Lord and consumed
them; thus they died before the Lord. Then Moses
said to Aaron, 'This is what the Lord meant when He
said: Through those near to Me I show Myself holy,
and gain glory before all the people.' And Aaron was
silent." (Leviticus 10:1-3)

This tragedy occurred on the eighth day of the
investiture ceremonies which consecrated Aaron and his
sons as priests following the establishment of the
Tabernacle. Because the text is somewhat vague,
commentaries through the ages have debated the nature of
Nadab and Abihu's sin which resulted in swift and
unexpected punishment. What seems to have happened is
that the priests acted on their own initiative regarding
some detail of the service. In a system containing an
untold number of specifications surrounding the
preparations and executions of sacrifices and other
offerings, one misstep is apparently intolerable. What
has always fascinated readers of this story is its final
two Hebrew words - VA-YIDOM AHARON - and Aaron was
silent.

Having just witnessed the execution of his sons
followed by some sort of rebuke by his brother, Aaron
does not cry out in anguish, complain at the injustice of
punishment without warning, or justify his sons' mistake.
He is silent. The man chosen by God to serve as Moses'
spokesman in their confrontations with Pharaoh and who
has repeatedly witnessed first hand the awesome power of
God is at this moment dumbstruck. Two questions about the
two words VA-YIDOM AHARON arise. Firstly, why indeed does
Aaron not speak? Was human reaction to devastation
inappropriate? Do we not find other Biblical characters
in dialogue with God giving expression to their emotions?

Secondly, why does the Torah tell us that he is
silent? Surely Aaron must have cried at some point,
commiserated with his wife, instructed his remaining sons
to be more careful from now on. But the Torah, famously
characterized as a document conservative with language,
omits all further discussion the family has on the
matter. Why tell us here that Aaron had nothing to say?
Mere absence of any recorded reaction would tell us
either that Aaron did not speak or that any utterance of
his did not merit inclusion in the Torah. What lesson do
we learn from Aaron's immediate silence?

Rabbi Yitzchak Abrabanel writing in the 15th century
portrays Aaron's reaction as total shock: "His heart
turned to stone and became still (DOMEM) and he did not
raise his voice to wail or mourn in pain for his sons.
Nor did he accept Moses' comfort for he had no soul left
and his speech was gone." But since this seems like a
normal reaction to what Aaron had just witnessed, isn't
telling us about it unnecessary?

Many commentators see Aaron's silence as a noble
acceptance of Divine judgement. Targum Yonatan ben Uziel,
for example, writes that Aaron was silent and received a
fine reward for holding his tongue. Rashi (Rabbi Shlomon
ben Yitzchak, 11th century) accepts this praise of Aaron
and identifies his particular reward - the priest merited
divine word being addressed to him alone (verses 8-11).

This approach certainly explains the Torah's desire
to tell us about Aaron's silence. The Midrash (Sifra) at
one point likens Aaron's silence to Abraham's complete
acceptance of the command to sacrifice his son. But once
we start making comparisons we see that there are plenty
of instances in the Bible where God's decisions and
judgments are challenged by man. These human pleas to God
are sometimes accepted and sometimes rejected, but rarely
is man rebuked for presuming to question God. Certainly
the entire institution of prayer is based on the notion
that man has a right (perhaps even an obligation) to
complain to God when unhappy with his lot.

The starting point for this level of interaction
between God and man is Abraham himself who challenges
God's plan to destroy Sodom with apparently little
attention to the righteous who might be living there.
Says he, "Far be it from You to do such a thing, to bring
death upon the innocent as well as the guilty, so that
innocent and guilty fare alike. Far be it from You! Shall
not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?" (Genesis
18:25) In an ironic reversal, the Rabbis fault Noah for
not complaining to God when the plan to destroy the world
in a flood is revealed to him.

The entire book of Job is one long challenge to
God's sense of justice. Job feels abused, mistreated, and
punished for no reason. He demands that God give him some
sort of explanation for the way he's been treated. When
God does appear to Job near the end of the book, He
doesn't snap "How dare you question My actions!" True,
God doesn't at that moment explain Himself - arguing
instead that He doesn't have to - but He accepts Job's
right to express himself.

Moses of course spends a good part of his career
pleading to God on behalf of the nation of Israel. In the
first such episode, the Golden Calf, we get a hint that
perhaps God will not in fact entertain any entreaties
whatsoever.

"The Lord said further to Moses, 'I see that this is
a stiff-necked people. Now, let Me be, that My anger
may blaze forth against them and that I may destroy
them, and make of you a great nation.' But Moses
implored the Lord his God, saying, 'Let not Your
anger, O Lord, blaze forth against Your people whom
You delivered from the land of Egypt with great
power and with a mighty hand.'" (Exodus 32:9-11)

In this exchange not only does Moses seem to ignore God's
demand to refrain from begging for the nation, but he
even manages to get God to recall his decree of
destruction against the nation!

Aaron is involved in several other incidents where
he does speak up. His participation in the creation of
the Golden Calf astounds Moses who asks "What did this
people do to you that you have brought such great sin
upon them?" In what seems like a justification, Aaron
answers:

"Let not my lord be enraged. You know that this
people is bent on evil. They said to me 'Make us a
god to lead us; for that man Moses, who brought us
from the land of Egypt- we do not know what has
happened to him.' So I said to them, 'Whoever has
gold take it off!' They gave it to me and I hurled
it into the fire and out came this calf!" (Exodus
32:21-24)

When confronted with leading the people to the sin
of idolatry, Aaron is not short of words - he explains
his own actions and describes the despair that led to the
nation's failure. Why does he not similarly explain to
Moses and the onlooking nation that his sons Nadab and
Abihu were merely trying to serve God with zeal?

Somewhat later, in Numbers chapter 12, Aaron in fact
takes the lead over his brother in defending their sister
Miriam. In another case where the nature of a sin is
obscure, Miriam is punished for her (and Aaron's) speech
against Moses. When she is struck with some form of skin
affliction it is Aaron who prods Moses into pleading to
God on her behalf: "And Aaron turned to Moses, 'O my
lord, account not to us the sin which we committed in our
folly. Let her not be as one dead, who emerges from his
mother's womb with half his flesh eaten away.' So Moses
cried out to the Lord, saying, 'O God, pray heal her!'"

There is another contrast in behavior between the
two brothers that might be telling, but which I cannot
explain. Both Moses and Aaron are punished for the
incident at Mei Meriva (Numbers 20) with God decreeing
that they shall not enter the Promised Land. The Torah
records a prayer that Moses offers to God towards
reversing that decision (Deuteronomy 3:23-28) which is
rejected. Aaron, however, is never quoted as asking for a
second chance. Why does only Moses take the chance on
persuading God to reconsider?

At thpoint readers might argue that in contrast to
the characters and incidents we've been discussing,
Aaron's silence in our parasha was not necessarily a
humble and blind acceptance of God's will, but a
recognition that it was too late to speak up. His sons
lay dead in their tracks and there was no purpose in
pleading on their behalf. Unlike Moses, at the Calf, for
example, who had an opportunity to change God's plan
before it was executed, any argument from Aaron at this
point would constitute, in the words of the mishna, a
TEFILAT SHAV - a futile prayer (Berakhot 9:3). If so, why
do Rashi and the other commentators praise Aaron? Is he
being credited for not shaking an angry fist at the
heavens shouting "how could you do this to me?" Could we
even imagine such a reaction possible from the high
priest?

Perhaps Aaron did not cry at the death of his sons
because he understood that to do so would be a repeat of
the sin which claimed their lives. Immediately after the
removal of Nadab and Abihu's bodies, Moses gives the
following instructions:

"And Moses said to Aaron and to his sons Eleazar and
Ithamar, 'Do not dishevel your hair and do not rend
your clothes, lest you die and anger strike the
whole community. But your kinsmen, all the house of
Israel, shall bewail the burning that the Lord has
wrought. And so do not go outside the entrance of
the Tent of Meeting, lest you die, for the Lord's
anointing oil is upon you.' And they did as Moses
had bidden." (verses 6-7)

Because Aaron was in the midst of the sin-offering
service, with anointing oil still on his head from his
consecration, he could not crumble in his own sorrow
thereby risking tainting the proceedings with an
inappropriate emotion.

Rashbam (Rabbi Shmuel ben Meir 12th century)
interprets Moses' speech of verse 3 along these lines:

"And Moses said to Aaron: Do not mourn nor weep nor
cease your service. Heed what I am telling you; this
is what the Lord meant when He said 'Through those
near to Me I show Myself holy' - I will become holy
through the high priests who are close to Me and who
serve Me, My service shall not become profane nor
shall My name. For this is what the Lord has
commanded - the high priest and his [sons] shall not
dishevel their hair nor rend their garments... do
not lay aside your tasks."

At the moment of his sons' deaths, Aaron, in full
priestly dress, was serving God and was thus immersed in
a public display of the sanctification of His name. With
all of Israel watching him, he might have shattered that
moment, turning it into a desecration of God's service.
One mumbled word, a single shed tear would demonstrate
that his own emotions had overridden the desire to
fulfill God's will. The service being described here
marked the culmination of the initiation program of the
Tabernacle and the sacrificial system; certainly the
opening ceremonies of a system to be performed precisely
according to God's instructions had to be flawless. Aaron
saw that his sons had allowed themselves to get carried
away in their service of God, and with a slight error in
judgement had imposed their own ideas into the service.
Aaron's silence demonstrated that a painful lesson had
been learned by all present, but that pain would have to
wait until the service's end to be expressed.

***********************************************************************