The Lomdus Of Mored B'Malchus - Bechukosai 5770

27:28 & 29 כח  אַךְ-כָּל-חֵרֶם אֲשֶׁר יַחֲרִם אִישׁ לַירוָר מִכָּל-אֲשֶׁר-לוֹ, מֵאָדָם וּבְהֵמָה וּמִשְּׂדֵה אֲחֻזָּתוֹ--לֹא יִמָּכֵר, וְלֹא יִגָּאֵל:  כָּל-חֵרֶם, קֹדֶשׁ-קָדָשִׁים הוּא לַיֶרוֶָר כט  כָּל-חֵרֶם, אֲשֶׁר יָחֳרַם מִן-הָאָדָם--לֹא יִפָּדֶה:  מוֹת, יוּמָת There is an idea of Cheirim. What is this Cheirim referring to? 

There is a Yesod Gadol here in the Ramban which is an important idea to know for the learning of Tanach. This point is then taken to explain many difficult Parshas in Tanach. The Ramban explains that this Posuk is teaching us a new Mitzvah in the Torah which is that Klal Yisrael as a whole is allowed to create new Issurin to the point of Mos Yumas. Meaning that you can give a Chiyuv Misah through a Cheirim. 

The Ramban himself explains with this a number of Parshiyois in Nach. We find at the end of Sefer Shoftim in Perek 21, That an entire city of Yaveish Gilad as brought down in 21:10 is killed out by soldiers of Klal Yisrael, י  וַיִּשְׁלְחוּ-שָׁם הָעֵדָה, שְׁנֵים-עָשָׂר אֶלֶף אִישׁ--מִבְּנֵי הֶחָיִל; וַיְצַוּוּ אוֹתָם לֵאמֹר, לְכוּ וְהִכִּיתֶם אֶת-יוֹשְׁבֵי יָבֵשׁ גִּלְעָד לְפִי-חֶרֶב, וְהַנָּשִׁים, וְהַטָּף  There was a specific cause that everyone was to join and this city didn’t join and was put into Cheirim. What right did they have to kill out an entire city? The Ramban says that right is based on our Posuk. 

We find also in Shmuel 1 Perek 14, that Yonason the son of Shaul is participating in a day of battle, and he ate during the day. In Posuk 44 Shaul says he is Chayuv Misah, מד  וַיֹּאמֶר שָׁאוּל, כֹּה-יַעֲשֶׂה אֱלֶֹרים וְכֹה יוֹסִף:  כִּי-מוֹת תָּמוּת, יוֹנָתָן מה  וַיֹּאמֶר הָעָם אֶל-שָׁאוּל, הֲיוֹנָתָן יָמוּת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה הַיְשׁוּעָה הַגְּדוֹלָה הַזֹּאת בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל--חָלִילָה חַי-יְרוָר אִם-יִפֹּל מִשַּׂעֲרַת רֹאשׁוֹ אַרְצָה, כִּי-עִם-אֱלֹרים עָשָׂה הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה; וַיִּפְדּוּ הָעָם אֶת-יוֹנָתָן, וְלֹא-מֵת  There had been a Gezaira by Shaul not to eat on the day of battle. Yonason didn’t know about this Gezaira and ate. The Posuk has to tell us that the people had to come together and find a way how to save Yonason from this Cheirim. What was the thought to kill him for eating something? The Ramban says it is based on our Posuk. 

The Chasam Sofer in a Teshuva in Orach Chaim 208 has a letter to the Maharitz Chayes which explains the concept of Mored B’malchus. We all know that someone who rebels against the king is Chayuv Misah. Where in the Torah do we find such a concept? The Chasam Sofer says that it comes from this Posuk (quoted above 27:29), from this Ramban. Anyone who is Mored B’malchus is violating a Takanah that was made right after Moshe Rabbeinu’s death in Sefer Yehosua 1:18  יח  כָּל-אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר-יַמְרֶה אֶת-פִּיךָ, וְלֹא-יִשְׁמַע אֶת-דְּבָרֶיךָ לְכֹל אֲשֶׁר-תְּצַוֶּנּוּ--יוּמָת:  רַק, חֲזַק וֶאֱמָץ This was a Cheirim made against any Mored B’malchus and the Chasam Soifer says that is the basis that gives the right to kill anybody who rebels against the king.  

The Maharitz Chayes himself disagrees and the Netziv in Ha'emek She'eila Siman 142:9 agrees with the Maharitz Chayes and they have a second Pshat on Mored B’malchus. They hold that anyone who is Mored B’malchus is endangering the whole Klal Yisrael and we know that anyone who endangers Klal Yisrael has a Chiyuv Misah. 

So it turns out that we have 2 Peshatim in Mored B’malchus; 1) the Chasam Sofer who says it is a Din Cheirim and 2) the Netziv who says it is a Din of a Roidef. 

One of the differences (Nafka Minah’s) are if you have to go to Bais Din so that they Pasken that he is Chayuv Misah. Tosafos in a few places in Shas is Mesupeik. According to the Chasam Sofer’s Pshat that it is a Cheirim you have to go to Bais Din like any other Chiyuv and Pasken. However, according to the Netziv that it is a Din Rodef, you don’t have to go to Bais Din. 

With this we can explain beautifully a Gemara in Maseches Megilla Daf 14a where it talks about Dovid’s intention to kill Naval Hakermeli for being Mored B’malchus אמרה לו וכי דנין דיני נפשות בלילה אמר לה מורד במלכות הוא ולא צריך למידייניה אמרה לו עדיין שאול קיים ולא יצא טבעך בעולם. Naval’s wife Avigail argues that he should not be killed. First she says can Dovid Pasken Dinei Nifashois at night? To which Dovid replies Mored B’malchus Hu and we don’t have to sit in judgment. Avigail then says Shaul is still alive so even though you are legally the king as Shmuel had already appointed Dovid as a King, he had done it secretly, so since it is not known there is not a Din of Mored B’malchus. 

The question that everyone asks is, why did Avigail first ask how can Dovid Pasken Dinei Nefashos at night, which is an inferior argument and not say right away that you Dovid are not known as the king yet? 

According to what we just discussed the Gemara is so Geshmak. There are 2 Dinim in a Mored B’malchus. The Chasam Soifer’s Din of Cheirim and the Netziv and the Maritz Chiyus Din of Ridef. So what happened? Avigail came and said there is a Din Cheirim, then you need a Bais Din. Meaning will Dovid Pasken Dinei Nefashos at night? To which Dovid replied, no he is a Mored B’malchus and therefore, does not need to have a Bais Din to Pasken. Meaning he is a Rodef and doesn’t need a Din Toirah. On the Din Rodef Avigail answers that Shaul is still alive and it is not known that you are king, Dovid. 

When do we say a Mored B’malchus has a Din Rodef? Only when he is endangering the public, because then the people won’t have respect for the king. In this case Dovid, you may legally be king but since it is not known there is no Din Rodef. She couldn’t present this argument first because the Din Cheirim would still apply and she had to argue first on that, meaning will you Dovid Pasken Dinei Nefashos at night. It is a very Geshmake understanding of a concept of Mored B’malchus which explains this Gemara and others as well.

What Went Wrong - Shelach 5771

Parshas Shelach is primarily about the Maiseh Hamiraglim which caused Klal Yisrael to remain in the Midbar for 40 years. One of the most difficult questions is how 10 people who were Anashim Roshei Yisrael could suddenly become such Reshaim.

I would like to share with you a Ramban followed by a Steipler which when taken together gives us a fantastic insight into what has taken place.

The Ramban says that the Yesod of the Cheit of the Meraglim was the following. They were sent into Eretz Yisrael to spy enough to see how Klal Yisrael should conquer Eretz Yisrael. How they should do it B’derech Hateva. Since the battle for the most part for the conquest of Eretz Yisrael would be B’derech Hateva (in a natural way) therefore it would be normal for Meraglim to go in and see how it should be done.

So their job was a question of how. So the Ramban says instead of trying to answer how, they went and answered if they should go in. They switched from an understanding of the question being how they should go in to a question of if they should go in. That Shinui from how to if was the root of their problem. So even though they were good people, when they understood the job that it was a question of if they should go in that was the first step that led them to a disaster of the Cheit Hamiraglim.

The Steipler in Birchas Peretz alludes to this Pshat, however, he doesn’t quote the Ramban. He adds a Nikuda. He points out that it seems to be a Stira in Rashi. Rashi 13:3 first says (כלם אנשים: כל אנשים שבמקרא לשון חשיבות, ואותה שעה כשרים היו) Kulam Anashim, B’ose Sha’a Kishairim Hayu. Rashi says that when they left they were Kishairim, they were good people.

On the other hand Rashi 13:26 also says (וילכו ויבואו: מהו וילכו, להקיש הליכתן לביאתן, מה ביאתן בעצה רעה, אף הליכתן בעצה רעה) Ma Biasan B’eitza Ra, Af Halichasan B’eitza Ra. Rashi says they went out with a bad plan. As if to say that they were Reshaim when they left and that is a contradiction between these two Rashi’s. (א"ה פנ"י קידושין סא: סובר שי"ל מדרשים חלוקים על שני דברי רש"י)

The Steipler explains beautifully. The Yesod is what are you going to investigate. Are you going to see how to enter Eretz Yisrael or are you going to see if to enter Eretz Yisrael. B’ose Sha’a Kishairim Hayu, before they were appointed they were Kishairim. The moment they were appointed, a certain Gaiva came upon them. A Gasas Haruach, a haughtiness. That haughtiness caused them to decide that they were the experts, they were going to be the generals so to speak who were going to decide if this conquest was feasible. That change from trying to investigate how to enter Eretz Yisrael which is the job of Kishairim, of good people to the decision to decide if to enter Eretz Yisrael, that change made them Yitziasan B’eitza Ra. They went out with a bad Eitza. It doesn’t mean that at that moment they were ready to destroy Klal Yisrael with their bad plans. But it means that the root of the problem, their view of themselves as the experts of Klal Yisrael, that image was a bad Eitza.

We can all understand that Shinui that change taking place rather quickly. The change from how should we enter Eretz Yisrael to if we should enter Eretz Yisrael. That change of jobs L’gamri, totally, and therefore it ended up causing something terrible to happen. 

In Sefer Yehoshua in Perek 2 we will see that Yehoshua also sends Meraglim and everyone wonders how after the debacle that takes place in Parshas Shelach, how does Yehoshua make the same mistake and send Meraglim.

The Chasam Sofer at the beginning of the Parsha explains that the idea of sending Meraglim was not a bad idea if they are going to see how to conquer. It was a bad idea because they went to see if they should conquer. Yehoshua made the point that Moshe Rabbeinu’s idea is not a bad idea and it was the people who by changing it from the how decision to an if decision that was caused a problem. 

I think it is fair to say that in life in general it is this way. Hakadosh Baruch Hu puts many challenges in front of us and our question is how to navigate the Matziv, the situation into which Hakadosh Baruch Hu places us. Very often our mentality is an if mentality. Not an if decision to choose which Nisyanos will come before us, however, an if only idea. A mentality that this shouldn’t be happening when something difficult happens. That mentality pushes people down. The idea that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is Hameichin Mitzadei Gover sets a person’s footsteps. Whatever challenge comes before you in your life as unpleasant as it may seem, is something that is put in front of you by the big Meichin Mitzadei Gover, by Hakadosh Baruch Hu and the question is only how to navigate and deal with the situation. When a person focuses on how, he can deal with situations well. This is a lesson from the Parshas Hamiraglim.

Because - Emor 5771

21:17 – 18 (יז דַּבֵּר אֶל-אַהֲרֹן, לֵאמֹר: אִישׁ מִזַּרְעֲךָ לְדֹרֹתָם, אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בוֹ מוּם--לֹא יִקְרַב, לְהַקְרִיב לֶחֶם אֱלֹ קָיו יח כִּי כָל-אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר-בּוֹ מוּם, לֹא יִקְרָב: אִישׁ עִוֵּר אוֹ פִסֵּחַ, אוֹ חָרֻם אוֹ שָׂרוּעַ) We have the commandment and prohibition against allowing a Bal Mum, a Jew who has some physical abnormality to do the Avoda in the Bais Hamikdash. The language of the Posuk is somewhat striking. We are commanded that a Jew who has a physical deformity is not permitted to do the service of the Bais Hamikdash. The reason is because anyone who has a physical deformity is not allowed to do the service of the Bais Hamikdash. That doesn’t seem to make sense. (כִּי) is giving a reason, don’t do this because. The Torah doesn’t always tell us reasons, however, sometimes it does.  Here it says, (אִישׁ מִזַּרְעֲךָ לְדֹרֹתָם, אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בוֹ מוּם--לֹא יִקְרַב, לְהַקְרִיב לֶחֶם אֱלֹ קָיו יח כִּי כָל-אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר-בּוֹ מוּם, לֹא יִקְרָב). Because anyone who has a Mum can’t do the Avodah. So it is saying that one cannot do the Avoda because one cannot do the Avoda. It is a Pliya? That is not a reason, it is just repeating the prohibition.

The Tosafos Beracha interprets as follows. He says the Torah is telling us that there are times that we have a Mitzvah to do and we ask why and there are times that we are told accept the Mitzvah without knowing the reason and do it because you were told to do it.

We find such an expression in the Gemara in Maseches Shabbos 21a (22 lines from the top) (א"ל אין מדליקין מאי טעמא לפי שאין מדליקין). Certain types of oils can’t be used to light Shabbos candles. Abaya asked why not? The Rebbi said because we don’t. He said don’t think into the reason, accept it.

Similarly, in Maseches Nidda 60a (9 lines from the bottom) (א"ל אין תולין מה טעם לפי שאין תולין). So we find that sometimes a Rebbi understood that you have to teach a Halacha without teaching the reason.  That is what the Torah is saying here as well. (אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בוֹ מוּם--לֹא יִקְרַב, לְהַקְרִיב לֶחֶם אֱלֹ קָיו יח כִּי כָל-אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר-בּוֹ מוּם, לֹא יִקְרָב). The reason is because someone who has a Mum is not allowed to do it. Now this is what it says in Tosafos Beracha.

We can add, why should the Torah do that only here, there are many Chukim in the Torah. There are many Mitzvos Stumim, Mizvos whose meanings are not known to us. There the Torah doesn’t use this expression. Only here by a Bal Mum do we use this expression. Why is that so?

The answer would seem to be as follows. There are many Mitzvos whose reasons are not known to us, and we accept it. Any intelligent human being knows that he will not understand everything. For example the Mitzva of Parah Aduma.  We know that it is above our understanding to figure out and appreciate why a red cow is used for that particular use. Or why an Esrog is waved on Sukkos with a Lulav. It is a Chok. Don’t ask, because.

By a Bal Mum, however, a human being who has feelings, would feel bad. Why should this person not be able to do the Avodah, just because he has a physical deformity? Is he any less of a Jew? Is he any less of a valuable person? Does that make him any less of a human being?

It goes against the usual grain of B’nei Yisrael, Rachmanim, Baishanim, Gomlei Chasadim. We who care for people. When we hear that because someone is a Bal Mum he is ineligible to do the Avodah, we would question it more harshly. You would think why should that be? It is Dafka here that the Torah tells us why? Because. Because I said that a Bal Mum should not be doing the Avodah.

I would add that we are now learning Sefer Yehoshua in the Motzoei Shabbos Navi Shiur. We will come to episodes in Yehoshua which involve a lot of killing and a lot of death, and one wonders, certainly an American in the 21^st century, so much killing so much death?

Strikingly the Rishonim don’t come to explain it, they don’t come to apologize for Sefer Yehoshua. It is as if to say this was the command of Hashem and we have to accept it. It is Dafka such an issue, an issue where our sense of fairness is challenged that we have to understand the concept of Ein L’har’er Acharov.