Parshas Chukas opens by talking about death, tumas hameis. “Adam ki yamus ba’ohel” (Bamidbar 19:2). Ramban shares a fascinating thought: The reason for tumas hameis is because of the atzas hanachash, because of the original sin of man that came on account of the snake, and one is only mekabeil tumah because of the malach hamaves who takes the person’s life. Those who die from neshika (Moshe, Aharon, Miriam and others), from G-d, are really not metamei min hadin. Ramban says that that’s the p’shat that it says that tzaddikim are not metamei in their death.

2) Tzaddikim Not Metamei

This is just an interesting topic in itself, so let me share two things. We know the gemara in Shabbos (55b) and it’s also in Bava Basra (17b) that four people died b’etyav shel nachash.  It’s a machlokes how to read that. Rashi says it’s “b’atzas hanachash”.  Other people say it’s the bite of the nachash.

Rekanti is a mefaresh, a kabbalist who came much later than the Ramban, who explains the Ramban al pi kabballah in many places. He says that tumas hameis comes because the malach hamaves puts a poison in the person, and someone that is metameih by it needs taharah from this, but someone who dies b’nishka, which is a kiss from G-d, al pi Hashem because he’s so connected to the Shechinah that Hashem just reveals himself to him, and his soul is drawn out of his body, there is no tumah. Thus, great tzaddikim are not metamei.

This concept of the tzaddikim not being metamei is explained in Tosfos (Bava Metzia 114b).  Tosfos says over a story that happened with Eliyahu HaNavi that they were burying Rabbi Akiva, the great tannah, and Eliyahu was there, and the other rabbanim asked him: What are you doing here? You’re a cohen!  Now, this is a dispute in it of itself whether Eliyahu HaNavi is a cohen, whether he’s Pinchas, etc. According to the Pirkei D’Rebbi Eliezer he is Pinchus and certainly a kohen. According to many other people he is not.  But, nonetheless, that’s what he said, and Eliyahu answered that tzaddikim are not metamin.

Meor v’Shemesh adds another point.  He says that the gemara says in Kesubes that the day that Rebbi died, “batla kehuna”. So, what does that mean?  That means that even the kohanim were allowed to be metamei to him because it wasn’t considered tumah because there was no tumah for them. And, Tosfos on Kesuvas 103b talks about this as well, and there are other sources as well. Finally, Rav Shevel brings down that the Zohar in Parshas Vayishlach 168a says: Rav Elazar says: Anyone that learns Torah l’shma, his death is not through the Yetzer Harah, it’s not through the malach hamaves because that’s the nachash that causes death, and therefore, tzaddikim that learn Torah, so they are not metamei.  Their body is not tamei.  And, the Rebono Shel Olam takes their neshama themselves. 

Now, of course, l’halacha we paskin that a cohen is not supposed to go to a beis hakevaros even of great tzaddikim and they are machmir on that generally.  Although, throughout history there have been people that have been mekeil about it, the general consensus is not to be mekeil because we don’t know who’s a tzaddik fully and who’s not etc., etc.  But, it’s just fascinating this whole idea.

3) Death is a Passage

As Jews, the Gesher HaChaim talks about this at length, we believe that the gemara tells us that death is a passage to the future world.  It’s a place where a person completed his mission and goes to, and he’ll be rewarded, like the Ramchal says in Derech Hashem, he’ll be, until mashiach comes, in a place that’s mei’ein Olam Habah, a form of Olam Habah if he did great things or a form of Geheinom if he did bad things, and then the Yom HaDin HaGadol will be the final time when he’ll be judged, etc.  

We know that kol Yisrael yeish lahem cheilek l’olam habah”.  All Jews have a cheilek in Olam Habah. 

On the grave of Rav Aryeh Levin zt”l he asked for his family to engrave on his tombstone a request: When people come to visit me, you should be mischazeik you emunah in Techiyas HaMeisim. A person shouldn’t go to the beis hakevaros and become uninspired and turned off and say: This is all that life has to offer.  On the contrary - life is an opportunity, to grow and to accomplish and to acquire nitchiyus.

The Midrash says that the sword and the sefer came down together, and if someone learns Torah, then he lives for eternity, and if a person doesn’t, and he wastes his time, then that’s the sword.  That’s the sword of death.  Tzaddikim even in death are called alive.

“Rest in Peace” a Jewish concept?

This is not to criticize the expression that we use which is “rest in peace”. It’s a very interesting one, and, of course, we do daven that a person should be, we learn from Avigail in Tanach when she said: Yihi nefesh adoni tzrurah b’tzror hachaim.  You should be tied up with G-d.  There is a certain amount of peace that we want a person to reach in life.  But, it’s interesting that in contrast to what Chazal describe, that “tzaddikim ein lahem menucha, lo b’olam hazeh v’lo b’olam habah”. The Tzaddikim don’t rest in this world or in the next, doesn’t mean that they’re under distress in the next world, but it just means that they are constantly growing and constantly learning more and more.  

This concept of “rest in peace” that we think about someone just kind of sitting in peace is not completely accurate.  We have to clarify that we use the exact opposite expression, that “ein lahem menucha” that the tzaddikim don’t have any rest which means that they are constantly growing and becoming closer to Hashem and learning deeper and deeper secrets of spirituality and greatness, and of course, this idea of “rest in peace” if use it as Jews what we refer to is jus that a person should complete his mission and should not leave the world with regrets or with unfinished business, but that they should be able to live a happy and healthy life and be able to come in front of the Rebono Shel Olam and say: Rebono Shel Olam, asisi shluchasi.  I did my job what you sent me to do.  I purified my neshama as much as I could, and I kept it as holy as possible.  “Eloki neshama shenasata be tehorah he”.  That’s how you gave it to me, and, hopefully, that’s how I’m returning it to You as well.

Death Brings Purpose

Those are some thoughts as we open up the parsha which talks about man and woman’s ultimate frailty, and we think about the purpose in life.  Death brings purpose to life.  It gives us something to focus on that a person is only here for a limited amount of time, and we all have things that we need to accomplish.

4) Mei Meriva

Moving on to a very complex topic, and I will try my best to do justice. This is a sin of Moshe and Aharon, and that’s important to say because they were both punished (Bamidbar 20:1). This is a big point of contention between mefarshim of the Mei Meriva, what exactly went wrong.  We should have siyata dishmaya to explain as much as we can.  Well, first, the Ramban explains very clearly.  It doesn’t say what Aharon and Moshe did wrong anywhere.  It doesn’t explain it at all.  It’s not mefarseim b’kasuv.

Rashi: Hit the Rock

Now, that being said, Rashi explains what happened here.  Rashi says that Hashem commanded them that you should speak to the rock, and He did not say to hit the rock, and if he would have spoken the Jews would have made a kal vachomer.  They would have said: What a tremendous kiddush Hashem this is because this rock that doesn’t even listen and doesn’t speak, but yet it fulfills the will of G-d, so us, all the more so, we should fulfill it.

Ramban: The Command Implied to Hit Again

Ramban says that Rashi’s words are based on Chazal, but the simple reading of the pesukim indicare otherwise. Hashem commanded them to take the stick.  And, so when you’re commanded to take the stick, that obviously means that you’re going to hit with it.  And, so, therefore, this is not correct.  Says the Ramban.  Don’t tell me the p’shat is that he hit the rock.  There’s no sin in hitting the rock. It was understood when he was taking it that he should hit it.

Re’em: No Implication

Re’em says that this is not true at all. He’s always the defender of Rashi. He says that it’s not true at all.  When Moshe and Aharon was commanded to go before Pharaoh, and he was to do the three signs, he was told to take the stick there, and the only time that he used the stick was one out of the three osos, when he threw the stick on the floor and it turned into a nachash.  The other two signs are the water turning into blood, and tzaraas had nothing to do with the stick, and, so, therefore, it’s not appropriate.

Magic Wand

Now, there’s an interesting discussion about this stick.  Was it kind of like a magician’s stick.  What do you do with it?  What is its’ purpose?  In today’s world of magic the magician usually waves the stick and does something with it or hits something in order to make things change.  So, there certainly is a concept that’s borrowed here with it.  But, there is also an aspect of speech.  “Abra cadabra” is the gemara in Shabbos which is “abra k’debara”.  I will create by means of speech. There is certainly something that is being done by speaking as well.  So, it’s just a fascinating idea that this magician stick might actually represent the sin of Moshe in some way.

Ramban: Jews Can Still Learn Lesson

Ramban says a second problem with Rashi is that, even if Moshe did hit the rock, and that’s what caused it to give forth water, the Jews could still make a kal vachomer; they could still say: Wow, that’s amazing. Look, this rock listened while being hit.  The rock had been hit earlier in the Midbar as well and that happened the tzivui, and the Jews could learn a lesson from there.  So, he doesn’t understand that.  Also, what is the “meristem pi”?  How did you rebel against G-d by doing this?  This thing is not explained very well according to Rashi.

Rambam: Anger

Ramban quotes the Moreh Nevuchim as explaining that Moshe and Aharon’s anger implied to the Jews that Hashem was angry with them and this was not true. See there for the full explanation and his issues with this idea. Ramban protests this pshat using very strong leshonos against. “hosif hevel al havalim”.  He adds foolishness onto foolishness.

Ramban says a number of different ideas, and the Ibn Ezra has a number of different p’shatim as well, and we’re not going to go into this at length. Look at the Orach Chaim if you want a list of ten p’shatim about what Moshe did wrong and about what Aharon did wrong as well.

Ramban: Taking Credit

Ramban explains, al pi kabballah, that there’s a big sod here what’s going on here. Moshe and Aharon seemed to be taking credit for extracting the water from the rock. The sin was not that they actively made a chillul Hashem, but rather that they did not use the opportunity to bring about a kiddush Hashem. Suffice it to say, this parsha is tough to understand, but we know that Hashem is strict with the righteous in order to perfect them.

Chazal explain that Moshe and Aharon were the leaders of the nation out of Egypt and since those who left Egypt all perished in the desert and only their children entered Eretz Yisrael, the leaders had to stay back with their flock.

5) One Prisoner of War

“Vayishvu mimenu shevi” (21:1). It says that the Jews were in a battle and they lost, a prisoner of war was taken.  Rashi says it was a shifcha, and this is one shifcha was kidnapped, Ramban explains that anytime the Jews fought they never had any loses whatsoever, and so even when they asked: Hayeish Hashem b’kirbeinu im ayin, and Amaleik attacked, nothing happened.  Nothing went wrong.  They didn’t lose anyone.  And, so therefore, Chazal explain that there was a minimal loss here that this one captive was taken.

Hashem at Their Side

When you look through Navi, throughout Yehoshua, you see how the Jews, when they fought battles, they fought, and they generally didn’t lose anyone in them.  And, the one time that the pasuk says in Iye that they lost thirty-six people, Chazal explain that it was actually only one person who was equal to half of Sanhedrin, rov of the Sanhedrin, and they explain why he was lost there, etc.  But, it’s an amazing thing that when the Jews were fighting they always had Hashem on their side, and that’s siyata diShmaya that was instilled in them.  They saw how Hashem was guiding them, and bringing them throughout the midbar and to bring them into Eretz Yisrael.

6) “Nachash Hanechoshes” Miracle Inside a Miracle

Moshe made a nechash hanechoshes (21:9). Ramban explains: How do we know that this is a nachash. Where does Rashi get that from?  It says that it was a seraf, which is probably an angel of some sort.  But, he says that Hashem likes to do a neis btoch neis. A miracle inside a miracle, as the doctors have explained, (Ramban himself was a medical doctor and very familiar with medical writings which weren’t many in the time) when a person gets bit by a poisonous dog or snake, when a person gets bit by a poisonous snake, so if they see that snake afterwards they’re more likely to succumb to a danger of the poison because they’re overwhelmed by it.

We know that one’s emotional health influences their physical health, and so it’s very important that if someone gets bit by a snake they shouldn’t see the snake again because it will influence them and they could possibly die. So here it was paradoxical that the Jews were dying in a plague, and yet Moshe pulled out, after they were being attacked by the snakes, Moshe pulls out a nechash hanechoshes for them to look at.  But, it wasn’t the idea of the nechash hanechoshes that saved them.  Rather, it was the putting themselves into, “meshabdim es libam l’Avihem sh’bashamayim.”  Like the mishana in Rosh Hashanah explains.  They were connecting to G-d in knowing that He was the one that brings victory and salvation, and that is, ultimately, what saved them, and that’s the neis betoch neis that show that Hashem is really guiding in the entire time.

7) Upon Request

Ramban (21:21) says a very fascinating thing which is based on a Sifri that what would have happened if Reuvein and Gad had not requested to get eiver hayardein, if they wouldn’t have taken the Jordan?  So, the Sifri says explicitly that the land would have just been left or maybe burned down, and the Jews would have all gone into Eretz Yisrael, and everyone would have gotten everything.  And, you might be wondering why I left out Menashe.  Menashe was not part of the request.  They were just split up in order to keep a streamline of half of Menashe was in one place, half of Menashe was in Eretz Yisrael proper; the other half in the Jordan, and that would keep up a travel line between them, so that they would always have a connection to the shevatim.  But, Reuvein and Gad were the ones that requested it.

Ripple Effect

There’s a fascination p’shat by the Megalleh Amukos about why specifically those shevatim, but it’s not for now, for this moment.  But, nonetheless, the idea that if they wouldn’t have asked for it and they wouldn’t have lived there.  Sometimes in life we do things and Hashem gives us free will to do, and, of course, ultimately, this was Hashem’s plan, so to speak.  But, the truth is that there was a taana against them that they put their animals first and that they wanted to live in trans-Jordan and not in the actual Eretz Yisrael proper, and a person has to be very careful because the decisions that we make influence all of our future generations, and when we look at our life with that sense of achrayus that we are the grandparents and the great-great grandparents of our descendents, we live life with a lot more kedushah and holiness, and we recognize that our actions are extremely impactful.  A small action could have a ripple effect for  generations to come

-

Rabbi Yosef Tropper is a rav and psychotherapist. Learn more and subscribe at ParshaThemes.com