In the Parsha we learn that Aharon Hakohen participated in the creation of the Eigel. Chazal are troubled by Aharon’s participation. What is often quoted is a Gemara in Maseches Sanhedrin 7a (7 lines from the top) (ופליגא דרבי תנחום בר חנילאי דאמר רבי תנחום בר חנילאי לא נאמר מקרא זה אלא כנגד מעשה העגל שנאמר וירא אהרן ויבן מזבח לפניו מה ראה א"ר בנימין בר יפת א"ר אלעזר ראה חור שזבוח לפניו אמר אי לא שמענא להו השתא עבדו לי כדעבדו בחור ומיקיים בי אם יהרג במקדש ה' כהן ונביא ולא הויא להו תקנתא לעולם מוטב דליעבדו לעגל אפשר הויא להו תקנתא בתשובה). The Gemara Darshuns the Posuk 32:5 (וַיַּרְא אַהֲרֹן, וַיִּבֶן מִזְבֵּחַ לְפָנָיו; וַיִּקְרָא אַהֲרֹן וַיֹּאמַר, חַג לַירוָר מָחָר)
Aharon saw, the Gemara asks what did Aharon see? The Gemara relates that Chur had refused to participate and Chur was killed by the mob. Aharon was afraid that if he too would be killed, there would be terrible repercussions on Klal Yisrael. There is a concept of (אם יהרג במקדש ה' כהן ונביא).
There is an Inyan if the Kohen and Navi are killed in the Mikdash Hashem it is a terrible thing. Therefore Aharon Hakohen chose to participate rather than to be killed as this would be a terrible Kitrug on Klal Yisrael. This is a well known Vort and is actually a Gemara in Sanhedrin 7 as has been stated already.
My question for the week is, this Gemara that says Aharon and Chur would be the Kohen and Navi seems to be inconsistent to something that we all know.
It is well known that until the time of the Eigel, the Kehunah was supposed to be given over to the Bechorim of Klal Yisrael (the first born). It was only as a consequence of the Cheit Ha’eigel that it was taken away from the Bechorim.
This idea is almost B’feirush in the Pesukim in Parshas Bamidbar and Behaloscha. There we read that Moshe Rabbeinu counts the number of Leviim and counts the number of Bechorim and is Podeh (makes an exchange) one for the other. As Rashi says in Parshas Bamidbar (מתוך בני ישראל: שיהיו ישראל שוכרין אותן לשירות שלי. על ידי הבכורות זכיתי בהם ולקחתים תמורתם, לפי שהיתה העבודה בבכורות, וכשחטאו בעגל נפסלו, והלוים שלא עבדו עבודה זרה נבחרו תחתיהם) the Bechorim should have done the Avodah up until this point. Therefore we have a major problem. If Aharon would be killed, that would not be the death of a Kohen and Navi. Aharon at that point before the Cheit Ha’eigel was not yet a Kohen, so it is not a case of Kohen V’navi. This seems to be an exceedingly difficult problem and a Kasha that begs resolution.
I had this Kasha and as I continued learning the Parsha I came to something else that will shed light on this. So let’s begin a second discussion.
Was the Cheit Ha’eigel something that took place before the building of the Mishkan, before the commandment to build the Mishkan or is it something that took place afterwards. As you know Parshas Ki Sisa is sandwiched between the Parshios of Terumah and Tetzaveh that discuss the Mishkan and Parshas Vayakhel Pekudai that discusses the Mishkan. Which took place first? The Cheit Ha’eigel or the commandment to build the Mishkan?
This is a Machlokes Rashi and Ramban. In 31:18 Rashi (ויתן אל משה וגו': אין מוקדם ומאוחר בתורה. מעשה העגל קודם לצווי מלאכת המשכן ימים רבים היה, שהרי בשבעה עשר בתמוז נשתברו הלוחות, וביום הכפורים נתרצה הקב"ה לישראל, ולמחרת התחילו בנדבת המשכן והוקם באחד בניסן) brings a Medrash Tanchuma that says the Cheit Ha’eigel preceded the commandment to build the Mishkan. So according to Rashi the Cheit Haeigel took place before the Parsha of Terumah and Tetzaveh and we use the principle of (אין מוקדם ומאוחר בתורה) and the Parshiyos are not always in order of the sequence of events.
The Ramban however in many places including the beginning of Parshas Vayakhel disagrees and says that the commandment to build the Mishkan was before the building of the Eigel. Klal Yisrael was commanded to build the Mishkan and after the Cheit Haeigel they were deemed unworthy of the Mishkan residing among them and only later when Moshe Rabbeinu came down on Yom Kippur with the second set of Luchos was the commandment actually fulfilled and the people built the Mishkan. This Ramban is the Shitta of the Zohar.
So we have 2 opinions. Rashi says the Cheit Ha’eigel was before the commandment to build the Mishkan and the Ramban says that the commandment to build a Mishkan preceded the Cheit Ha’eigel. Of course the Ramban fits better with the order of the Parshiyos of the Torah.
There is a problem here because in Parshas Tetzaveh when there was a commandment to make the Bigdei Kehunah we have mentioned numerous times that it was for Aharon and his children as Kohanim. According to Rashi it is fine, after the Eigel Aharon and his children are going to be Kohanim. However, according to the Ramban where the Parshiyos of Terumah and Tetzaveh preceded the Cheit Ha’eigel we have a serious difficulty. Before the Eigel was built, the Bigdei Kehunah were going to be for the Bechorim. So the question then is, why does it say for Aharon and his children? This is a Kasha on the Shitta of the Ramban.
The grandchildren of the Steipler printed some of his notes and letters in a Sefer called Rishumai Kehillas Yaakov. In there, there is a letter that addresses this and the Steipler says something that is an extraordinary Chiddush, not something that we would have understood on our own, but once we hear it many things come out good.
The Steipler says the following Chiddush. Aharon and his descendents were going to be Kohanim in any event. We learn this in Parshas Shemos when Rashi says (וראך ושמח בלבו: לא כשאתה סבור שיהא מקפיד עליך שאתה עולה לגדולה. ומשם זכה אהרן לעדי החשן הנתון על הלב) that Aharon saw Moshe Rabbeinu when he was returning to Mitzrayim and he rejoiced with the good fortune of Moshe Rabbeinu. The Schar for that was that the Kehuna went to Aharon.
Aharon was going to be Kohen anyway. The whole issue of Bechor or Sheivet Levi had to do with the Leviim alone. Only the Leviim were people who achieved their status because of the Cheit Ha’eigel, because they refrained from participating. So that Aharon would have been Kohen anyway. The whole Parshas Bamidbar and Parshas Behaloscha was a tradeoff of Bechorim against Leviim. It was only the Leviim who were Zoche after the Cheit Ha’eigel.
A Raya to this is if the Bechorim were to be Kohanim why were the Bechorim of Sheivet Levi deprived of that privilege? If the Bechorim were supposed to be Kohanim so then a Bechor from Sheivet Levi should have been a Kohen even after the Cheit Ha’eigel?
Therefore says the Steipler, it must be that the Kohanim were going to be Kohanim anyway and it had nothing to do with the Cheit Ha’eigel and the whole issue is a tradeoff of Leviim and Bechorim and that is it. This of course answers both questions the question (that was supposed to be the question of the week) of (אם יהרג במקדש ה' כהן ונביא) and the question of Aharon and his children from Parshas Tetzaveh.
There is a bonus, because it answers something else as well. It is known in the name of the Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh that the Bechorim will return to do the Avodah when Moshiach comes. We don’t know where the Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh learned that from because we don’t have Midrashim that say it. However, we are relying in the Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh.
It is a problem because the Gemara says how do we know that there will be Techiyas Hameisim? We know it because the Posuk says Terumah will be given to Aharon Hakohen. The problem is that Aharon never lived to enter Eretz Yisrael to receive Terumah. The Gemara says in the Yemos Hamashiach he will receive Terumah. If Kohanim will no longer be Kohanim after Moshiach comes as the Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh seems to say, why would Aharon get Terumah? According to the Steipler’s Yesod it is beautiful, the Kohanim are Kohanim. The entire issue is an issue of Leviim alone.
There are other questions that are answered by this. If you bear this in mind in Parshas Bamidbar and Parshas Behaloscha you will see that other difficulties are answered as well. It is a beautiful Yesod.
(See Shemos 5772)
(See Shemos 5772)
אין תגובות:
הוסף רשומת תגובה