A.
Our parasha ends with the peculiar ceremony of the ‘egla ‘arufa, the “beheaded heifer.” As the Torah tells us, the circumstance is that a corpse is found lying in some field in the Holy Land; no-one knows who this person is, nor do the know how he died. The local rabbinic authorities, זקניך ושפטיך (“your elders and judges”), measure the relative distances from the surrounding towns to the site, to determine the one closest to the corpse. The authorities of that town are to take an עגלת בקר אשר לא עבד בה אשר לא משכה בעל: והורדו זקני העיר ההוא את העגלה אל נחל איתן אשר לא יעבד בו ולא יזרע וערפו שם את העגל בנחל: ונגשו הכהנים בני לוי כי בם בחר ד' אלקיך לשרתו ולברך בשם ד' ועל פיהם יהיו כל ריב וכל נגע: (“heifer of beef who has never been worked, has never drawn the yoke. And the elders of that town will bring the heifer down to a barren stream-bed [nahal eithan] which will never be worked nor sown. and they will behead there the heifer in the dry stream-bed. And the kohanim bënei Lévi will approach, for it is they whom Ha-Shem your G-d chose to serve Him and to bless in Ha-Shem’s name and according to them [is settled] every quarrel and every affliction”; XXI, 3-5).
The kohanim and the local rabbis wash their hands over the beheaded calf, and declare: ידינו לא שפכה את הדם הזה ועינינו לא ראו: כפר לעמך ישראל אשר פדית ד' ואל תתן דם נקי בקרב עמך ישראל ונכפר להם הדם: (“Our hands did not shed [lo’ shafëchu] this blood and our eyes did not see. Atone for Your people Israel whom You have redeemed, and put not innocent blood in the midst of Your people Israel; and the blood will be atoned them”; ibid., 7-8).
Two things stand out in this rather riveting ritual, and beg to be explained:
Rashi summarizes the Talmud (סוטה מ"ח:) in his comments in explanation of the declaration: וכי עלתה על לב שזקני בית דין שופכי דמים הם אלא לא ראינוהו ופטרנוהו בלא מזונות ובלא לוי' (“Did it enter the heart that the elders of the local court were shedders of blood!? Rather, ‘We did not see him and dismiss him without provisions and without an escort'”). In other words, had this poor fellow passed through our town, he would not have been allowed to proceed alone, unprotected, to an uncertain fate.
That said, two things in particular stand out in this passage, and beg to be interpreted:
(1) Why does the Torah make a point of ancestry of the kohanim, who here are engaged in their core function of maintaining the relationship between the Holy Nation and Ha-Shem by maintaining the peace, calling them bënei Lévi, specifically regarding this particular occurrence? After all, every kohén is a lineal descendant of Moshe’s older brother Aharon it has been no secret ere now that they are therefore Lëviyyim.
(2) The sharp-eyed reader with a living sense will have noted that the word “shed,” sha-fëchu, is spelt not with the expected vav on the end, but rather with a hé, suggesting a feminine singular verb (“she shed”), rather than a third person plural. Why?
B.
The Even ‘Ezra asks why it is so important that the nearest town to the unfortunate deceased be involved: ויתכן שהשם צוה לעשות כן העיר הקרובה כי לולי שעשו עבירה כדומה לה לא נזדמן להם שיהרג אדם קרוב מהם ומחשבות השם עמקו וגבהו לאין קץ אצלינו (“And it would seem that Ha-Shem commanded the nearest town to do this, because, had they not committed a transgression similar to [what Rashi mentions], it would not have occurred that a person would be killed near them; Ha-Shem’s thoughts are endlessly deep and exalted for us.”)
This comment would appear to be inspired, at least to some extent, by the final verse in our parasha: ואתה תבער הדם הנקי מקרבך כי תעשה הישר בעיני ד' (“And you shall expunge the innocent blood from your midst, for you will do what is upright in Ha-Shem’s eyes”).
If the declaration made by the town’s hachamim is accurate and not mere rhetoric (we assume as a matter of course that they have done their due diligence and found no glaring instance of callous behaviour of the sort mentioned) why does this unfortunate’s innocent blood need to be expunged? Of course the inhabitants should “do what is upright in Ha-Shem’s eyes,” regardless of the tragedy discovered in their vicinity.
Hazal apply the principle which the Even ‘Ezra discerns to be at work here in many arenas. For instance, concerning the case of a sota, a woman suspected of adultery (cf. Numbers V, 11-31), followed immediately by the account of a nazir, a person who vows to abstain from wine (ibid., VI, 1-21), the Talmud relates: תניא ר' אומר למה נסמכה פרשת נזיר לפרשת סוטה לומר לך שכל הרואה סוטה בקלקולה יזיר עצמו מן היין (“It is taught: Rabbi [Yëhuda ha-Nasi’] says, 'Anyone who sees a sota in her disgrace should vow to abstain from wine”; ברכות ס"ג. וע"ע סוטה ב. ונזיר ב.). That he came to witness such a sight should be viewed as primâ facie evidence that some flaw in his character is also being highlighted; similarly, in our case, if the elders are unable to unearth any obvious case of malfeasance which might have occasioned this person’s death, the only course is to try to strengthen the town’s general level of observance, especially of the mitzvoth she-bein adam la-havéro, (“mitzvoth between man and his fellow”) in hopes of catching and correcting whatever subtle problem is being indicated.
C.
With this in mind, let us take our question of the kohanim bënei Lévi.
Hazal tell us דהא כהנים מסטרא דחסד אתו ואע"ג דאחיד אהרן בהוד בחסד נמי אחיד (“that the kohanim come from the side of hesed [‘kindness’], even though Aharon is singled out by the [sëfira of] Hod, he is also singled out by hesed”; זוה"ק ח"א רנ"ו: בהשמטות). A bit later, the Zohar goes on to explain that Hod is indicative of gëvura (“might, power”; שם רס"ו:), so that we see that Aharon, and therefore his descendants, partake of both qualities.
As it happens, this dual-rootedness of the kohanim in hesed and gëvura appears to be a direct consequence of the Levitical heritage whence they sprang: פקודא דא להיות הלויים משוררים במקדש כו' הכא צריך לחדש מלין דהא כהן איהו מקריב קרבנא ואיהו מיכאל לוי איהו גבריאל איהו צריך לנגנא ורזא דמלה "יומם יצוה ד' חסדו" דא חסד כהנא רבא כו' "ובלילה שירה עמי" דא גבורה. שירה "בכור שורו הדר לו". "ופני שור מהשמאול" וגבריאל שלוחי' וגו' (“This mitzva that the Lëviyyim be singers [mëshorërim] in the Sanctuary... Here it is necessary to originate words, for a kohén is the one who brings sacrifice [and in this, functions like the angel] Micha’él; the Lévi is Gavri’él, he is obliged to sing. And the essence of the matter is ‘By day Ha-Shem commands His hesed’ [Psalms XLII, 9] – this is the hesed of the kohén gadol [since all sacrifices are offered by day]...’and by night, sing [shira], My people’ [ibid.] – this is gëvura. [The meaning of] ‘Shira’ [may be learnt from] ‘the first-born, His ox [shor] is His splendor’ [Deuteronomy XXXIII, 17]’; ‘And the face of a shor on the left’ [Ezekiel I, 10], and Gavri’él is His emissary....”; זוה"ק ח"ג קכ"א: ברעיא מהימנא ; the entire passage hangs on rabbinic puns, gëvura and Gavri’él sharing a root, and mëshorér, shira, and shor likewise sharing a primal root).
And: "קח את הלויים" וגו' הא אוקמוה דבעי לדכאה לון לאמשכא לון לאתקשרא באתרייהו בגין דאינון דרועא שמאלא וסטרא דדינא וגו' (“‘Take the Lëviyyim....’ [Numbers VIII, 6]; it is established that it is necessary to compel them, to draw them, to put them in their places, for they are of the left arm and the side of judgment [sitra dë-dina]....”; שם שם קנא:).
The kohanim, then, represent hesed arising from gëvura and din, responsible hesed, hesed which has some basis in the relative merits of those to whom it is applied. Once the original dispensation of unbridled hesed, unlimited and unrelated to its recipients’ merits (symbolized by the twenty-six verses of כי לעולם חסדו in Psalms CXXXVI, apposite the 26 generations from Creation to the generation of Exodus), which ran its course, and frustrated and blocked itself, necessitating Israel’s Exodus from Egypt and acceptance of the Torah to clear the blockage, whereupon Aharon and his sons were appointed kohanim to keep the renewed energy of hesed flowing, thus holding physical and metaphysical entropy at bay. But their management of Israel’s, and the world’s, relationship with Ha-Shem also necessitates their reaching deep into the Levitical roots.
The declaration of the local hachamim over the ‘egla ‘arufa that, to their knowledge, no-one in the nearby town was guilty of gross indifference or stinginess toward the unfortunate stranger found in the vacant field, is telling. Verse 5, after rehearsing that the kohanim are bënei Lévi, goes on to describe their function in resolving disputes and dealing with nëga‘im, afflictions of tzora‘ath. Hazal tell us, based on Leviticus XIII, 2-6, שהנגעים באים על צרות העין (“that the nëga‘im come because of stinginess”; יומא י"א:), at least those which afflict houses. But the determination that a given manifestation on the wall of one’s house is genuine tzora‘ath is made by a kohén....
Sometimes, the maintenance of the vital relationship between this world and the next requires gëvura and din in the sense of rochaha, “rebuke,” over the discovery of some neglected area of observance; in this case, an apparently subtle neglect of the mitzvoth bein adam la-havéro which led to the townspeople’s coming to witness, in their own backyard, as it were, so violent and horrifically ultimate a violation of those mitzvoth, that they might see and take heed....
That function of tochaha requires the gëvura and din inherent in the kohanim through their Levitical heritage.
D.
Which brings us to our orthographical oddity.
The Ém la-Miqra’ vëla-Massoreth notes that the phrase לא שפכה, as the words are written rather than lo’ shafëchu, “(they have not shed,” as they are read, consists of the initials of lëviya, achila, shëthiya, parnasath kol ha-derech (“escort, eating, drinking, provisioning for the whole way”), i.e. the very things which the town’s elders deny having neglected, and yet, as a result of whatever subtle flaw there has been in their observance of these very things, they have been, in however slight or indirect a fashion, parties to the premature departure of a human soul. The gimatriya or numerical value of the letter ה is “five,” and the complete human soul, known by the abbreviation נרנח"י (conventaionally vocalised neronhay, consists of five metaphysical components, from lowest to highest, nefesh, ruah, nëshama, hayya, yëhida.
Now that we are in the month of Elul, final month of the sacred year, it is customary every morning to sound the shofar, the ram’s horn whose plaintive call to tëshuva is meant to remind us, too, that even if our observance of the mitzvoth might seem exemplary, might even pass the muster of our own rabbinical authorities, there is nonetheless always room for improvement.
May we all come to recognize those areas on our own, and resolve to do better in the new year, that we not require a wake-up call such as the ‘egla ‘arufa.
No comments:
Post a Comment